Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

India needs an educated PM 🔥 In May 2009, UPA won LS elections Next day, Share market went mad and hit peak with Nifty getting upper circuit of 20% Experts said : "Share market salutes Dr Manmohan Singh" 🫡 Sensex jumps 17.24% 🔼 Realty index up 25.37% 🔼 ICICI...

Amockx2022's profile picture

Amock_

108,778 subscribers

42,435 views • 5 days ago •via X (Twitter)

FinanceNews & Politics
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

May 2009 : UPA won Loksabha Next day : Share market hit Peak Nifty : Upper circuit 20% 🔥 Dr Manmohan Singh was 1000x better PM than over hyped Modi • Sensex jumps 17.24% 🔼 • Realty index up 25.37% 🔼 • Capital Goods index up 23.47% 🔼 • Bank index up 20.27% 🔼 • Oil & Gas index up 19.57% 🔼 • BHEL up 33% 🔼 • L&T up 30% 🔼 • ICICI up 25% 🔼 • HDFC up 24% 🔼 Those golden days of India
2:20

May 2009 : UPA won Loksabha Next day : Share market hit Peak Nifty : Upper circuit 20% 🔥 Dr Manmohan Singh was 1000x better PM than over hyped Modi • Sensex jumps 17.24% 🔼 • Realty index up 25.37% 🔼 • Capital Goods index up 23.47% 🔼 • Bank index up 20.27% 🔼 • Oil & Gas index up 19.57% 🔼 • BHEL up 33% 🔼 • L&T up 30% 🔼 • ICICI up 25% 🔼 • HDFC up 24% 🔼 Those golden days of India

Amock_

75,036 views • 10 months ago

🔥 The ULTIMATE Frankball Deep Dive - WHY Tottenham's defence is locked in but the attack’s struggling? ➡️Joao Palhinha’s been a monster ball-winner ... one of the best in the league at shielding the back line... but when it comes to build-up he looks limited... very few progressive passes... not the press-resistant six Spurs need compared to a Zubimendi-type profile who moves play forward with risk and precision ➡️ Brennan Johnson’s another casualty of the new setup... he was a threat down the right where he could run onto the ball but now on the left he’s forced into build-up play... and that’s not his game - his link-up breaks under pressure ➡️ Djed Spence is slowing Spurs down too in the build up phase, always wants to shift onto his right foot... extra touches... more recycling, less verticality which is having a knock on effect on Xavi Simons who was used to Raum at Leipzig bombing on and holding the width. ➡️ Without Son Heung-min and Harry Kane the final third has lost its elite edge... less decisiveness... fewer game-changers and for a pragmatic coach like Frank who depends on clinical finishers rather than a fluid attacking system... that’s a big problem, doesn't help no Kulu or Madders either. The upside: 🔼They’re harder to beat 🔼Set-pieces look drilled (Attacking AND Defensive) 🔼Opposition getting fewer clean looks at goal... So yes... the defence is fixed... but the attack needs time for key personnel to get fit, some rejigging positions wise and possibly transfers made in January and beyond. #THFC
2:25

🔥 The ULTIMATE Frankball Deep Dive - WHY Tottenham's defence is locked in but the attack’s struggling? ➡️Joao Palhinha’s been a monster ball-winner ... one of the best in the league at shielding the back line... but when it comes to build-up he looks limited... very few progressive passes... not the press-resistant six Spurs need compared to a Zubimendi-type profile who moves play forward with risk and precision ➡️ Brennan Johnson’s another casualty of the new setup... he was a threat down the right where he could run onto the ball but now on the left he’s forced into build-up play... and that’s not his game - his link-up breaks under pressure ➡️ Djed Spence is slowing Spurs down too in the build up phase, always wants to shift onto his right foot... extra touches... more recycling, less verticality which is having a knock on effect on Xavi Simons who was used to Raum at Leipzig bombing on and holding the width. ➡️ Without Son Heung-min and Harry Kane the final third has lost its elite edge... less decisiveness... fewer game-changers and for a pragmatic coach like Frank who depends on clinical finishers rather than a fluid attacking system... that’s a big problem, doesn't help no Kulu or Madders either. The upside: 🔼They’re harder to beat 🔼Set-pieces look drilled (Attacking AND Defensive) 🔼Opposition getting fewer clean looks at goal... So yes... the defence is fixed... but the attack needs time for key personnel to get fit, some rejigging positions wise and possibly transfers made in January and beyond. #THFC

Pythagoras In Boots ⚽️

34,686 views • 10 months ago

$75B leaves the market in a single day. Larry McDonald calls it a "colossal sucking sound." SpaceX at $75B raised. Google front-ran it with an $80B mandatory convertible - a structure where conversion to equity is automatic, not optional, a classic sign of aggressive capital raising. Then Anthropic and OpenAI queue up next. McDonald's argument on The Master Investor Podcast: the "sideline cash" narrative is wrong. Most of that money is corporate capital, not investor dry powder. The probability of "a serious hit to the market - not an '87 but significant - is very high." His portfolio advice: rotate out of cap-weighted S&P 500 index and into equal-weight or globally diversified equity. At 50% tech and AI concentration vs financials at 24% before 2008, the index is carrying more risk than most 401K holders understand. What the macro bear says about your portfolio: Source: The Master Investor Podcast with Wilfred Frost -
5:40

$75B leaves the market in a single day. Larry McDonald calls it a "colossal sucking sound." SpaceX at $75B raised. Google front-ran it with an $80B mandatory convertible - a structure where conversion to equity is automatic, not optional, a classic sign of aggressive capital raising. Then Anthropic and OpenAI queue up next. McDonald's argument on The Master Investor Podcast: the "sideline cash" narrative is wrong. Most of that money is corporate capital, not investor dry powder. The probability of "a serious hit to the market - not an '87 but significant - is very high." His portfolio advice: rotate out of cap-weighted S&P 500 index and into equal-weight or globally diversified equity. At 50% tech and AI concentration vs financials at 24% before 2008, the index is carrying more risk than most 401K holders understand. What the macro bear says about your portfolio: Source: The Master Investor Podcast with Wilfred Frost -

Podcast Alpha

53,655 views • 2 months ago

Vanguard founder Jack Bogle explains his nuanced view on index funds vs. ETFs: Jack Bogle, the man who created the index fund, clarifies that his concerns aren't with broad index investing itself. His issue is with how ETFs tempt investors to behave badly and how the industry has weaponized the ETF structure for gimmicks. He starts by noting just how dominant index funds have become: “The dominance of index funds, which accounts for 28% of the market, is partly due to ETFs representing more than half of that share." But here's where he draws the line: “I have nothing against broad ETFs per se, but rather the narrow, managed ones and the way people misuse the broad versions." On broad ETFs vs. traditional index funds: they're the same thing Bogle makes clear that structurally, there's no meaningful difference between a Vanguard S&P 500 ETF and what he calls a "TIFF" (Traditional Index Fund), a term he coined to distinguish them: "They both own exactly the same portfolio and are part of the same portfolio, meaning their returns will be identical. Both types cost around five or six basis points at the Admiral class level." He explains Vanguard's pricing: Below roughly $10,000 invested, you'll pay 10 to 12 basis points, but once you cross the Admiral threshold, "the funds are identical." So what's the real problem with ETFs? Behavior. The ability to trade intraday creates temptation: "My slight bias against ETFs stems from the temptation to trade in the middle of the day when trouble arises." He points out how pointless this reactive trading is: "Getting out in the middle of the day is often a reaction to market volatility, such as the market dropping 300 points and then recovering in the second half of the day. This 'bouncing around' is meaningless in the long run." What he actually endorses: Bogle is clear that broad market index funds, whether structured as ETFs or traditional funds, all serve investors well: "Broad market index funds, including the S&P 500, total bond market, total US stock market, international, and even emerging market funds, are all acceptable 'total market funds'." Where the industry lost the plot: His sharpest criticism is reserved for what the ETF industry has become: "The industry has become a marketing business focused on 'crazy' or 'stupid' ideas that no one else has thought of." He offers specific examples: An emerging cancer ETF" he once criticized in the Wall Street Journal, today's "cloud computing" ETFs, and leveraged products offering 100%, 200%, or even 300% exposure, letting investors bet on the market going up or down by three times. His verdict on these: "The sense behind these types of investments is beyond my comprehension."
4:25

Vanguard founder Jack Bogle explains his nuanced view on index funds vs. ETFs: Jack Bogle, the man who created the index fund, clarifies that his concerns aren't with broad index investing itself. His issue is with how ETFs tempt investors to behave badly and how the industry has weaponized the ETF structure for gimmicks. He starts by noting just how dominant index funds have become: “The dominance of index funds, which accounts for 28% of the market, is partly due to ETFs representing more than half of that share." But here's where he draws the line: “I have nothing against broad ETFs per se, but rather the narrow, managed ones and the way people misuse the broad versions." On broad ETFs vs. traditional index funds: they're the same thing Bogle makes clear that structurally, there's no meaningful difference between a Vanguard S&P 500 ETF and what he calls a "TIFF" (Traditional Index Fund), a term he coined to distinguish them: "They both own exactly the same portfolio and are part of the same portfolio, meaning their returns will be identical. Both types cost around five or six basis points at the Admiral class level." He explains Vanguard's pricing: Below roughly $10,000 invested, you'll pay 10 to 12 basis points, but once you cross the Admiral threshold, "the funds are identical." So what's the real problem with ETFs? Behavior. The ability to trade intraday creates temptation: "My slight bias against ETFs stems from the temptation to trade in the middle of the day when trouble arises." He points out how pointless this reactive trading is: "Getting out in the middle of the day is often a reaction to market volatility, such as the market dropping 300 points and then recovering in the second half of the day. This 'bouncing around' is meaningless in the long run." What he actually endorses: Bogle is clear that broad market index funds, whether structured as ETFs or traditional funds, all serve investors well: "Broad market index funds, including the S&P 500, total bond market, total US stock market, international, and even emerging market funds, are all acceptable 'total market funds'." Where the industry lost the plot: His sharpest criticism is reserved for what the ETF industry has become: "The industry has become a marketing business focused on 'crazy' or 'stupid' ideas that no one else has thought of." He offers specific examples: An emerging cancer ETF" he once criticized in the Wall Street Journal, today's "cloud computing" ETFs, and leveraged products offering 100%, 200%, or even 300% exposure, letting investors bet on the market going up or down by three times. His verdict on these: "The sense behind these types of investments is beyond my comprehension."

Black Edge

13,757 views • 2 months ago

🚨 WARNING: THE NEXT 24 HOURS WILL CRASH GLOBAL MARKETS!! Most investors don't see what's coming. Read this before buying stocks. 3 AI and space giants are going public in the same year with a combined valuation approaching $4 trillion: 1. The biggest IPO wave in decades - SpaceX could become the largest IPO in history, raising up to $75 billion($SPCX will debut on Nasdaq on June 12) - OpenAI has already filed a confidential S-1 and is targeting a valuation above $1 trillion - Anthropic is also considering a public listing at a valuation of around $1 trillion 2. The S&P 500 is currently being carried mostly by the Mag 7 and AI-related stocks (Nvidia, Microsoft, Google, Amazon, etc.), which make up roughly 33-35% of the index These 3 IPO could create a massive liquidity drain as investors move $75-200+ billion into SpaceX, OpenAI, and Anthropic shares Funds and investors would likely sell existing positions in today's market leaders to free up capital, with Nvidia, Microsoft, and Google among the first likely to feel the pressure On top of that, the S&P 500 has so far resisted fast-tracking these unprofitable giants into the index, meaning the capital rotation effect could put even more pressure on existing index components 3. History shows a concerning pattern At the peak of every major market bubble, capital became concentrated in a small group of "can't lose" companies: - The Roaring Twenties - The Nifty Fifty era - Japan's 1980s asset bubble - The Dot-Com Bubble of 1999-2000 Today, capital concentration in the tech sector is once again near historical extremes 4. After an IPO, early investors get the opportunity to lock in profits Historically, lock-up expirations have often increased selling pressure on newly public stocks During the Dot-Com era, even some of the highest-quality companies suffered massive drawdowns: - Amazon: -95% - Microsoft: -65% - Intel: -80% - Oracle: -80% - Yahoo: -97% A great business doesn't protect investors from overvaluation IPOs at these kinds of valuations, while many AI companies are still deeply unprofitable, are often a sign of market euphoria I've said this before, and the cycle is still playing out exactly according to plan Turn on notifications and drop your thoughts below The next phase is gonna be very important
0:31

🚨 WARNING: THE NEXT 24 HOURS WILL CRASH GLOBAL MARKETS!! Most investors don't see what's coming. Read this before buying stocks. 3 AI and space giants are going public in the same year with a combined valuation approaching $4 trillion: 1. The biggest IPO wave in decades - SpaceX could become the largest IPO in history, raising up to $75 billion($SPCX will debut on Nasdaq on June 12) - OpenAI has already filed a confidential S-1 and is targeting a valuation above $1 trillion - Anthropic is also considering a public listing at a valuation of around $1 trillion 2. The S&P 500 is currently being carried mostly by the Mag 7 and AI-related stocks (Nvidia, Microsoft, Google, Amazon, etc.), which make up roughly 33-35% of the index These 3 IPO could create a massive liquidity drain as investors move $75-200+ billion into SpaceX, OpenAI, and Anthropic shares Funds and investors would likely sell existing positions in today's market leaders to free up capital, with Nvidia, Microsoft, and Google among the first likely to feel the pressure On top of that, the S&P 500 has so far resisted fast-tracking these unprofitable giants into the index, meaning the capital rotation effect could put even more pressure on existing index components 3. History shows a concerning pattern At the peak of every major market bubble, capital became concentrated in a small group of "can't lose" companies: - The Roaring Twenties - The Nifty Fifty era - Japan's 1980s asset bubble - The Dot-Com Bubble of 1999-2000 Today, capital concentration in the tech sector is once again near historical extremes 4. After an IPO, early investors get the opportunity to lock in profits Historically, lock-up expirations have often increased selling pressure on newly public stocks During the Dot-Com era, even some of the highest-quality companies suffered massive drawdowns: - Amazon: -95% - Microsoft: -65% - Intel: -80% - Oracle: -80% - Yahoo: -97% A great business doesn't protect investors from overvaluation IPOs at these kinds of valuations, while many AI companies are still deeply unprofitable, are often a sign of market euphoria I've said this before, and the cycle is still playing out exactly according to plan Turn on notifications and drop your thoughts below The next phase is gonna be very important

WhaleTwits

109,688 views • 2 months ago

🚨 THIS IS HOW AI BUBBLE WILL CRASH S&P 500 Read the post carefully before buying stocks 3 AI and space giants are going public in the same year with a combined valuation approaching $4 trillion: 1. The biggest IPO wave in decades - SpaceX could become the largest IPO in history, raising up to $75 billion( $SPCX will debut on Nasdaq on June 12) - OpenAI has already filed a confidential S-1 and is targeting a valuation above $1 trillion - Anthropic is also considering a public listing at a valuation of around $1 trillion 2. The S&P 500 is currently being carried mostly by the Mag 7 and AI-related stocks (Nvidia, Microsoft, Google, Amazon, etc.), which make up roughly 33-35% of the index These 3 IPO could create a massive liquidity drain as investors move $75-200+ billion into SpaceX, OpenAI, and Anthropic shares Funds and investors would likely sell existing positions in today's market leaders to free up capital, with Nvidia, Microsoft, and Google among the first likely to feel the pressure On top of that, the S&P 500 has so far resisted fast-tracking these unprofitable giants into the index, meaning the capital rotation effect could put even more pressure on existing index components 3. History shows a concerning pattern At the peak of every major market bubble, capital became concentrated in a small group of "can't lose" companies: - The Roaring Twenties - The Nifty Fifty era - Japan's 1980s asset bubble - The Dot-Com Bubble of 1999-2000 Today, capital concentration in the tech sector is once again near historical extremes 4. After an IPO, early investors get the opportunity to lock in profits Historically, lock-up expirations have often increased selling pressure on newly public stocks During the Dot-Com era, even some of the highest-quality companies suffered massive drawdowns: - Amazon: -95% - Microsoft: -65% - Intel: -80% - Oracle: -80% - Yahoo: -97% A great business doesn't protect investors from overvaluation IPOs at these kinds of valuations, while many AI companies are still deeply unprofitable, are often a sign of market euphoria I've said this before, and the cycle is still playing out exactly according to plan Turn on notifications and drop your thoughts below The next phase is gonna be very important
0:39

🚨 THIS IS HOW AI BUBBLE WILL CRASH S&P 500 Read the post carefully before buying stocks 3 AI and space giants are going public in the same year with a combined valuation approaching $4 trillion: 1. The biggest IPO wave in decades - SpaceX could become the largest IPO in history, raising up to $75 billion( $SPCX will debut on Nasdaq on June 12) - OpenAI has already filed a confidential S-1 and is targeting a valuation above $1 trillion - Anthropic is also considering a public listing at a valuation of around $1 trillion 2. The S&P 500 is currently being carried mostly by the Mag 7 and AI-related stocks (Nvidia, Microsoft, Google, Amazon, etc.), which make up roughly 33-35% of the index These 3 IPO could create a massive liquidity drain as investors move $75-200+ billion into SpaceX, OpenAI, and Anthropic shares Funds and investors would likely sell existing positions in today's market leaders to free up capital, with Nvidia, Microsoft, and Google among the first likely to feel the pressure On top of that, the S&P 500 has so far resisted fast-tracking these unprofitable giants into the index, meaning the capital rotation effect could put even more pressure on existing index components 3. History shows a concerning pattern At the peak of every major market bubble, capital became concentrated in a small group of "can't lose" companies: - The Roaring Twenties - The Nifty Fifty era - Japan's 1980s asset bubble - The Dot-Com Bubble of 1999-2000 Today, capital concentration in the tech sector is once again near historical extremes 4. After an IPO, early investors get the opportunity to lock in profits Historically, lock-up expirations have often increased selling pressure on newly public stocks During the Dot-Com era, even some of the highest-quality companies suffered massive drawdowns: - Amazon: -95% - Microsoft: -65% - Intel: -80% - Oracle: -80% - Yahoo: -97% A great business doesn't protect investors from overvaluation IPOs at these kinds of valuations, while many AI companies are still deeply unprofitable, are often a sign of market euphoria I've said this before, and the cycle is still playing out exactly according to plan Turn on notifications and drop your thoughts below The next phase is gonna be very important

Leni

551,721 views • 2 months ago

This is the most SHAMELESS structural manipulation of a major index I've ever seen. SpaceX is preparing what could be the largest IPO in history. Target valuation: $1.75 trillion. That would make it the sixth-largest company in America on day one. And Nasdaq wants the listing so badly they're literally CHANGING how the Nasdaq-100 works. In February, Nasdaq published a "consultation" proposing sweeping changes to how companies enter the index. The timing is pure coincidence, of course. Just like it's pure coincidence that SpaceX has reportedly made fast index inclusion a CONDITION of listing on Nasdaq. Here's what they're proposing: A new "Fast Entry" rule would let any newly listed company whose market cap ranks in the top 40 of current Nasdaq-100 members get added to the index after just 15 trading days. No seasoning period. No liquidity requirements. Completely exempt from the standards every other company had to meet. Currently, new public companies typically wait up to a year before they're eligible for major index inclusion. That waiting period exists for a reason. It lets the market establish real price discovery. It protects passive investors from being forced into untested, illiquid stocks. And Nasdaq wants to throw all of that out. For ONE listing. But the Fast Entry rule isn't even the worst part... The real scandal is the 5x float multiplier. Right now, the S&P 500 uses a free-float adjusted methodology. If only 5% of a company's shares are available for public trading, the index weights you at 5% of total market cap. That's common sense. You weight a company based on what investors can actually buy. Nasdaq's current methodology already uses total market cap rather than free-float for weighting. But for very low-float stocks, they at least had a 10% minimum float threshold. Under the new proposal, that threshold DISAPPEARS entirely. Instead, any stock with less than 20% free float gets weighted at FIVE TIMES its actual float percentage, capped at 100%. Do the math on SpaceX: If SpaceX IPOs at $1.75 trillion and floats 5% of its shares, there would be roughly $87.5 billion worth of stock available for public trading. Under Nasdaq's proposed 5x multiplier, the index would weight SpaceX at 25% of its total market cap. That means passive funds would be forced to buy as if SpaceX were a $437.5 billion company. But only $87.5 billion of stock actually exists in the market. You are forcing hundreds of billions in passive buying into a $87.5 billion float. QQQ alone manages nearly $400 billion. The total Nasdaq-100 ecosystem represents over $1.4 trillion in exposure across ETFs, mutual funds, structured notes, and derivatives. Every single passive vehicle tracking this index would be REQUIRED to buy SpaceX at whatever price the market dictates. On Day 15. With zero price discovery. Zero track record as a public company. And a float so thin you could read through it. So what this actually does is it creates a structural wealth transfer mechanism. The passive bid from index funds pushes the stock price higher. That higher price benefits exactly one group of people: the insiders and early investors who own the other 95% of the shares. And when lock-up periods expire 90 to 180 days later? Those insiders sell into the artificially inflated passive bid. Your 401(k) is the exit liquidity. This is the fundamental corruption of indexing. Indexing used to be brilliant. Low cost. Efficient. You were free-riding on the price discovery done by active managers. The index reflected the market. Now the index IS the market. Trillions of dollars flow blindly into whatever the index tells them to buy. And the people who control the index methodology are changing the rules to serve the interests of a single IPO candidate. The S&P 500 requires companies to have at least 50% of shares available for public trading. It requires 6 to 12 months of seasoning. It uses free-float adjusted weighting so passive investors aren't buying phantom liquidity. Nasdaq is doing the exact opposite. 15 days. No float requirement. 5x multiplier on insider-held shares. Every passive investor in QQQ, QQQM, and every fund benchmarked to the Nasdaq-100 should understand what's about to happen: The rules are being rewritten to benefit IPO issuers and early-stage insiders, and your capital is the tool being USED to enrich them. 45 years in this business and I've watched Wall Street find creative new ways to separate retail investors from their money in every cycle. But usually they at least try to be subtle about it. This one they put in a PDF and called it a "consultation." What's your take?
0:45

This is the most SHAMELESS structural manipulation of a major index I've ever seen. SpaceX is preparing what could be the largest IPO in history. Target valuation: $1.75 trillion. That would make it the sixth-largest company in America on day one. And Nasdaq wants the listing so badly they're literally CHANGING how the Nasdaq-100 works. In February, Nasdaq published a "consultation" proposing sweeping changes to how companies enter the index. The timing is pure coincidence, of course. Just like it's pure coincidence that SpaceX has reportedly made fast index inclusion a CONDITION of listing on Nasdaq. Here's what they're proposing: A new "Fast Entry" rule would let any newly listed company whose market cap ranks in the top 40 of current Nasdaq-100 members get added to the index after just 15 trading days. No seasoning period. No liquidity requirements. Completely exempt from the standards every other company had to meet. Currently, new public companies typically wait up to a year before they're eligible for major index inclusion. That waiting period exists for a reason. It lets the market establish real price discovery. It protects passive investors from being forced into untested, illiquid stocks. And Nasdaq wants to throw all of that out. For ONE listing. But the Fast Entry rule isn't even the worst part... The real scandal is the 5x float multiplier. Right now, the S&P 500 uses a free-float adjusted methodology. If only 5% of a company's shares are available for public trading, the index weights you at 5% of total market cap. That's common sense. You weight a company based on what investors can actually buy. Nasdaq's current methodology already uses total market cap rather than free-float for weighting. But for very low-float stocks, they at least had a 10% minimum float threshold. Under the new proposal, that threshold DISAPPEARS entirely. Instead, any stock with less than 20% free float gets weighted at FIVE TIMES its actual float percentage, capped at 100%. Do the math on SpaceX: If SpaceX IPOs at $1.75 trillion and floats 5% of its shares, there would be roughly $87.5 billion worth of stock available for public trading. Under Nasdaq's proposed 5x multiplier, the index would weight SpaceX at 25% of its total market cap. That means passive funds would be forced to buy as if SpaceX were a $437.5 billion company. But only $87.5 billion of stock actually exists in the market. You are forcing hundreds of billions in passive buying into a $87.5 billion float. QQQ alone manages nearly $400 billion. The total Nasdaq-100 ecosystem represents over $1.4 trillion in exposure across ETFs, mutual funds, structured notes, and derivatives. Every single passive vehicle tracking this index would be REQUIRED to buy SpaceX at whatever price the market dictates. On Day 15. With zero price discovery. Zero track record as a public company. And a float so thin you could read through it. So what this actually does is it creates a structural wealth transfer mechanism. The passive bid from index funds pushes the stock price higher. That higher price benefits exactly one group of people: the insiders and early investors who own the other 95% of the shares. And when lock-up periods expire 90 to 180 days later? Those insiders sell into the artificially inflated passive bid. Your 401(k) is the exit liquidity. This is the fundamental corruption of indexing. Indexing used to be brilliant. Low cost. Efficient. You were free-riding on the price discovery done by active managers. The index reflected the market. Now the index IS the market. Trillions of dollars flow blindly into whatever the index tells them to buy. And the people who control the index methodology are changing the rules to serve the interests of a single IPO candidate. The S&P 500 requires companies to have at least 50% of shares available for public trading. It requires 6 to 12 months of seasoning. It uses free-float adjusted weighting so passive investors aren't buying phantom liquidity. Nasdaq is doing the exact opposite. 15 days. No float requirement. 5x multiplier on insider-held shares. Every passive investor in QQQ, QQQM, and every fund benchmarked to the Nasdaq-100 should understand what's about to happen: The rules are being rewritten to benefit IPO issuers and early-stage insiders, and your capital is the tool being USED to enrich them. 45 years in this business and I've watched Wall Street find creative new ways to separate retail investors from their money in every cycle. But usually they at least try to be subtle about it. This one they put in a PDF and called it a "consultation." What's your take?

George Noble

869,568 views • 5 months ago

Global funds are holding a massive 225k short position against Indian index futures, betting on a market crash. But the market isn't falling. Why? Wall Street's valuation models are 12 months out of date. 1/ Foreign bears are focused on sluggish single-digit profit growth in headline Nifty 50 numbers. But beneath the surface, a structural industrial boom is underway. 2/ The catalyst? India's Real Effective Exchange Rate (REER) reset from an overvalued 119 down to a fair value of 103 by March 2026. Flat dollar revenues are converting into massive rupee profits for local exporters. 3/ The result: Mid-caps are seeing 34% YoY growth and small-caps are hitting 25%. Capital is migrating straight into physical logistics, heavy infrastructure, automotive production, and shipping. 4/ On top of that, India has outgrown its label as a standard emerging market. As the US decouples from China, Western capital increasingly views India's scale and digital infrastructure as a mandatory geopolitical hedge. 5/ While foreign funds stack up shorts, domestic Indian investors are fighting back with 163k long contracts. If the bears are forced to panic buy to cover their losses, it sets up a massive, violent upward squeeze. #IndianStockMarket #Nifty #Macroeconomics #ShortSqueeze #FII
4:04

Global funds are holding a massive 225k short position against Indian index futures, betting on a market crash. But the market isn't falling. Why? Wall Street's valuation models are 12 months out of date. 1/ Foreign bears are focused on sluggish single-digit profit growth in headline Nifty 50 numbers. But beneath the surface, a structural industrial boom is underway. 2/ The catalyst? India's Real Effective Exchange Rate (REER) reset from an overvalued 119 down to a fair value of 103 by March 2026. Flat dollar revenues are converting into massive rupee profits for local exporters. 3/ The result: Mid-caps are seeing 34% YoY growth and small-caps are hitting 25%. Capital is migrating straight into physical logistics, heavy infrastructure, automotive production, and shipping. 4/ On top of that, India has outgrown its label as a standard emerging market. As the US decouples from China, Western capital increasingly views India's scale and digital infrastructure as a mandatory geopolitical hedge. 5/ While foreign funds stack up shorts, domestic Indian investors are fighting back with 163k long contracts. If the bears are forced to panic buy to cover their losses, it sets up a massive, violent upward squeeze. #IndianStockMarket #Nifty #Macroeconomics #ShortSqueeze #FII

Rohit Srivastava

11,035 views • 3 months ago

🚨 WARNING: THIS IS HOW AI BUBBLE WILL CRASH S&P 500 Read the post carefully before buying stocks. 3 AI and space giants are going public in the same year with a combined valuation approaching $4 trillion: 1. The biggest IPO wave in decades - SpaceX could become the largest IPO in history, raising up to $75 billion ($SPCX will debut on Nasdaq on June 12) - OpenAI has already filed a confidential S-1 and is targeting a valuation above $1 trillion - Anthropic is also considering a public listing at a valuation of around $1 trillion 2. The S&P 500 is currently being carried mostly by the Mag 7 and AI-related stocks (Nvidia, Microsoft, Google, Amazon, etc.), which make up roughly 33-35% of the index These 3 IPO could create a massive liquidity drain as investors move $75-200+ billion into SpaceX, OpenAI, and Anthropic shares Funds and investors would likely sell existing positions in today's market leaders to free up capital, with Nvidia, Microsoft, and Google among the first likely to feel the pressure On top of that, the S&P 500 has so far resisted fast-tracking these unprofitable giants into the index, meaning the capital rotation effect could put even more pressure on existing index components 3. History shows a concerning pattern At the peak of every major market bubble, capital became concentrated in a small group of "can't lose" companies: - The Roaring Twenties - The Nifty Fifty era - Japan's 1980s asset bubble - The Dot-Com Bubble of 1999-2000 Today, capital concentration in the tech sector is once again near historical extremes 4. After an IPO, early investors get the opportunity to lock in profits Historically, lock-up expirations have often increased selling pressure on newly public stocks During the Dot-Com era, even some of the highest-quality companies suffered massive drawdowns: - Amazon: -95% - Microsoft: -65% - Intel: -80% - Oracle: -80% - Yahoo: -97% A great business doesn't protect investors from overvaluation The next few days will be INSANE, but don't worry - I'll break down every move as it happens, like I always do. Like it or not, I called every major top and bottom of the last decade publicly. I'll call this one too. Many people are going to wish they followed me before June 12, 2026. Soon, you'll understand why.
0:37

🚨 WARNING: THIS IS HOW AI BUBBLE WILL CRASH S&P 500 Read the post carefully before buying stocks. 3 AI and space giants are going public in the same year with a combined valuation approaching $4 trillion: 1. The biggest IPO wave in decades - SpaceX could become the largest IPO in history, raising up to $75 billion ($SPCX will debut on Nasdaq on June 12) - OpenAI has already filed a confidential S-1 and is targeting a valuation above $1 trillion - Anthropic is also considering a public listing at a valuation of around $1 trillion 2. The S&P 500 is currently being carried mostly by the Mag 7 and AI-related stocks (Nvidia, Microsoft, Google, Amazon, etc.), which make up roughly 33-35% of the index These 3 IPO could create a massive liquidity drain as investors move $75-200+ billion into SpaceX, OpenAI, and Anthropic shares Funds and investors would likely sell existing positions in today's market leaders to free up capital, with Nvidia, Microsoft, and Google among the first likely to feel the pressure On top of that, the S&P 500 has so far resisted fast-tracking these unprofitable giants into the index, meaning the capital rotation effect could put even more pressure on existing index components 3. History shows a concerning pattern At the peak of every major market bubble, capital became concentrated in a small group of "can't lose" companies: - The Roaring Twenties - The Nifty Fifty era - Japan's 1980s asset bubble - The Dot-Com Bubble of 1999-2000 Today, capital concentration in the tech sector is once again near historical extremes 4. After an IPO, early investors get the opportunity to lock in profits Historically, lock-up expirations have often increased selling pressure on newly public stocks During the Dot-Com era, even some of the highest-quality companies suffered massive drawdowns: - Amazon: -95% - Microsoft: -65% - Intel: -80% - Oracle: -80% - Yahoo: -97% A great business doesn't protect investors from overvaluation The next few days will be INSANE, but don't worry - I'll break down every move as it happens, like I always do. Like it or not, I called every major top and bottom of the last decade publicly. I'll call this one too. Many people are going to wish they followed me before June 12, 2026. Soon, you'll understand why.

DANNY

42,087 views • 2 months ago

Don't be surprised when you see an ETF fall 30% in ONE day. Everyone in this market is playing the same game: They know prices are stretched, but they stay fully invested because they're convinced they'll be the first ones out the door when things go wrong. Millions of investors all standing next to the same exit, all believing they'll beat everyone else through it. But there's a BIG problem with that plan. On the way up, nobody complained because we were all drunk on making money. But the car also runs in reverse. Look at the mechanics underneath this market: There is record leverage, zero DTE options everywhere, levered ETFs stuffed with the same crowded names, and a mountain of trend-following money. If the market rises X, the CTAs have to buy Y. But what happens when it goes DOWN? Two weeks ago, I said the trap door was going to open under these crazy tech stocks, and that the best short opportunities of my 45 year career were in semis, Mag 7, and the consumer. Two weeks later, the semiconductor index is down nearly 20% from its record. That is bear market territory. The Nasdaq fell almost 3% this week. Micron dropped more than 10% in a single day. I also said the next $10 to $15 in crude was UP while retail speculators sat record short. Crude went from under $72 to over $82 and the shorts got carried out on stretchers. AI is the BIGGEST bubble the world has ever seen. My good friend Julian Garran at MacroStrategy Partners estimates the malinvestment at 17 TIMES what we saw in dot com. Tell me about the cash flows. Tell me about the return on investment. WHERE IS IT? Tech-related names are roughly 40% of the index. When this train wreck finishes, it takes the indices down with it. My positioning: I own resource and energy stocks, hedged, and I am short consumer discretionary and tech. That trade works whether the market goes up or down. And if you're going to panic, panic early.
17:55

Don't be surprised when you see an ETF fall 30% in ONE day. Everyone in this market is playing the same game: They know prices are stretched, but they stay fully invested because they're convinced they'll be the first ones out the door when things go wrong. Millions of investors all standing next to the same exit, all believing they'll beat everyone else through it. But there's a BIG problem with that plan. On the way up, nobody complained because we were all drunk on making money. But the car also runs in reverse. Look at the mechanics underneath this market: There is record leverage, zero DTE options everywhere, levered ETFs stuffed with the same crowded names, and a mountain of trend-following money. If the market rises X, the CTAs have to buy Y. But what happens when it goes DOWN? Two weeks ago, I said the trap door was going to open under these crazy tech stocks, and that the best short opportunities of my 45 year career were in semis, Mag 7, and the consumer. Two weeks later, the semiconductor index is down nearly 20% from its record. That is bear market territory. The Nasdaq fell almost 3% this week. Micron dropped more than 10% in a single day. I also said the next $10 to $15 in crude was UP while retail speculators sat record short. Crude went from under $72 to over $82 and the shorts got carried out on stretchers. AI is the BIGGEST bubble the world has ever seen. My good friend Julian Garran at MacroStrategy Partners estimates the malinvestment at 17 TIMES what we saw in dot com. Tell me about the cash flows. Tell me about the return on investment. WHERE IS IT? Tech-related names are roughly 40% of the index. When this train wreck finishes, it takes the indices down with it. My positioning: I own resource and energy stocks, hedged, and I am short consumer discretionary and tech. That trade works whether the market goes up or down. And if you're going to panic, panic early.

George Noble

90,367 views • 1 month ago

🚨 S&P 500 IS SETTING UP FOR A 20% CRASH The index has been weakening for weeks, but most people still see it as a normal pullback. I think the bigger move is still ahead. Wave 6 may have already marked the top. Now the macro backdrop is getting worse: → June CPI hit 3.5% → Energy prices are rising again → The Fed held rates at 3.50%-3.75% → 3 FOMC members wanted a hike → Markets now price a real chance of another hike this year That's a problem for an index this concentrated. Five stocks are carrying the entire market: → Apple → Nvidia → Amazon → Microsoft → Meta $SPX has 503 companies, but a handful of mega-caps are doing most of the work. Now the leaders are starting to crack. Meta dropped 8% in one day after earnings, while AI spending keeps climbing. We've seen this setup before. 2018: Fed hikes → nearly 20% SPX drawdown 2022: Fed tightening → 25% peak-to-trough decline If the Fed hikes again, the AI trade could reprice fast. My target: ~$7,800 → ~$6,200 That's a 20%+ correction. I've called all of the S&P selloffs this year, I know what im talking about. The next market call matters more. Follow + turn notifications on. I'll post the next major move before it becomes obvious.
0:29

🚨 S&P 500 IS SETTING UP FOR A 20% CRASH The index has been weakening for weeks, but most people still see it as a normal pullback. I think the bigger move is still ahead. Wave 6 may have already marked the top. Now the macro backdrop is getting worse: → June CPI hit 3.5% → Energy prices are rising again → The Fed held rates at 3.50%-3.75% → 3 FOMC members wanted a hike → Markets now price a real chance of another hike this year That's a problem for an index this concentrated. Five stocks are carrying the entire market: → Apple → Nvidia → Amazon → Microsoft → Meta $SPX has 503 companies, but a handful of mega-caps are doing most of the work. Now the leaders are starting to crack. Meta dropped 8% in one day after earnings, while AI spending keeps climbing. We've seen this setup before. 2018: Fed hikes → nearly 20% SPX drawdown 2022: Fed tightening → 25% peak-to-trough decline If the Fed hikes again, the AI trade could reprice fast. My target: ~$7,800 → ~$6,200 That's a 20%+ correction. I've called all of the S&P selloffs this year, I know what im talking about. The next market call matters more. Follow + turn notifications on. I'll post the next major move before it becomes obvious.

Ulun

127,760 views • 21 days ago

The taxation regime of gas and oil exploration in this country is not understood which has led to an enormous amount of misinformation. Here are the facts: 1. Oil and gas companies pay 30 cents tax on their profits just like every other company in Australia. That means that Australians already have 30% ownership. 2. Oil and gas companies pay a super profit tax on their profits known as the Petroleum Resource Rent Tax. The PRRT has collected very little revenue to date for two reasons a) there has been an enormous amount of capital invested in getting these projects up resulting in large depreciation offsets and b) the gas was foolishly sold forward at very cheap prices when the projects were given the go ahead. A lot of these contracts will roll off over the next decade resulting in larger profits and a larger tax for taxpayers. 3. 70-80% of gas and oil exploration in Australia is unsuccessful. Offshore gas exploration is not a multi million dollar business- it’s a multi billion dollar business. The idea that taxpayers should fund 30% of offshore oil and gas exploration is absurd. The last person to come up with that idea was Gough Whitlam. Needless to say no banks would lend against such a proposition. has always had a policy to abolish the PRRT and replace it with a 5-10% royalty on Sales. Combined with the 30% company tax that will guarantee that Australians share in over 40% of the profits of any offshore oil and gas project. That’s an excellent return given taxpayers incur no risk. I’ve done up a table in comments showing the share Australians will receive based on operating profit margin before tax. David Pocock, the Greens and One Nation are all wrong on this. The formers 25% export tax will wipe out most of the profits made eliminating the incentive to further explore for gas. One Nation offering to fund 30% of exploration costs for mostly foreign owned companies will expose taxpayers to billions of dollars in subsidies with no guarantee of return. Australia desperately needs sensible economic reform. Unfortunately none of the parties in Canberra have a clue how to make this happen.
3:57

The taxation regime of gas and oil exploration in this country is not understood which has led to an enormous amount of misinformation. Here are the facts: 1. Oil and gas companies pay 30 cents tax on their profits just like every other company in Australia. That means that Australians already have 30% ownership. 2. Oil and gas companies pay a super profit tax on their profits known as the Petroleum Resource Rent Tax. The PRRT has collected very little revenue to date for two reasons a) there has been an enormous amount of capital invested in getting these projects up resulting in large depreciation offsets and b) the gas was foolishly sold forward at very cheap prices when the projects were given the go ahead. A lot of these contracts will roll off over the next decade resulting in larger profits and a larger tax for taxpayers. 3. 70-80% of gas and oil exploration in Australia is unsuccessful. Offshore gas exploration is not a multi million dollar business- it’s a multi billion dollar business. The idea that taxpayers should fund 30% of offshore oil and gas exploration is absurd. The last person to come up with that idea was Gough Whitlam. Needless to say no banks would lend against such a proposition. has always had a policy to abolish the PRRT and replace it with a 5-10% royalty on Sales. Combined with the 30% company tax that will guarantee that Australians share in over 40% of the profits of any offshore oil and gas project. That’s an excellent return given taxpayers incur no risk. I’ve done up a table in comments showing the share Australians will receive based on operating profit margin before tax. David Pocock, the Greens and One Nation are all wrong on this. The formers 25% export tax will wipe out most of the profits made eliminating the incentive to further explore for gas. One Nation offering to fund 30% of exploration costs for mostly foreign owned companies will expose taxpayers to billions of dollars in subsidies with no guarantee of return. Australia desperately needs sensible economic reform. Unfortunately none of the parties in Canberra have a clue how to make this happen.

Gerard Rennick

25,352 views • 3 months ago

The S&P 500 just hit an all-time high. But consumer sentiment just hit an all-time low. Both happened in the same week. Think about this. On April 15, the S&P 500 closed above 7,000 for the first time in history. Traders were celebrating on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange. The Nasdaq posted its longest winning streak since 2009 - 12 consecutive days of gains. And 5 days earlier, the University of Michigan Consumer Sentiment Index dropped to 47.6. The LOWEST reading in the survey's 74 year HISTORY. Lower than the 2008 financial crisis. Lower than the COVID crash. Lower than the worst of the post-pandemic inflation surge. Lower than anything recorded since Harry Truman was president. Every single demographic group declined. Every age bracket. Every income level. Every political affiliation. Every component of the index (current conditions, future expectations, personal finances, buying conditions) ALL fell. 1 year inflation expectations spiked to 4.8%, up a full percentage point from March. That's the steepest single-month jump since April 2025. Business expectations crashed 20% in a single month. And 98% of the survey was completed BEFORE the ceasefire was announced. These people aren't pessimistic because of headlines. They're pessimistic because of their grocery bills, their gas prices, and their shrinking purchasing power. Meanwhile, Wall Street is throwing a party. Morgan Stanley's Mike Wilson went on CNBC and declared "the lows are in." He said the market is rotating back into pro-cyclical names and that we should expect things to "resolve constructively." Resolve constructively? The ceasefire expires Wednesday. Iran just re-closed the Strait of Hormuz AGAIN. Brent crude is back near $98. The US Navy is still blockading Iranian ports. Peace talks in Pakistan collapsed over the weekend after Iran refused to abandon its nuclear program. And the stock market is priced for a happy ending. Here's what 45 years on Wall Street have taught me: When markets and consumers disagree this violently, one of them is wrong. The S&P 500 is trading at all-time highs because 7 mega cap tech stocks (powered by AI narratives) account for nearly half the index's market cap. Those stocks run on their own dynamic independent of anything, including the war in Iran. That's a market being dragged to record highs by a handful of names while the real economy deteriorates underneath. Can you call this a healthy market? Software stocks are down 28% this year. The broader SaaS index is down nearly 40%. Private credit is imploding. Gas prices are surging. Consumer buying conditions for big-ticket items are collapsing. But the S&P hit 7,000 so everything must be fine. I remember in 2000, consumer sentiment peaked in January. Two months later the Nasdaq topped. Within a year it had lost 39%. In 2007, the S&P 500 hit its record in October. Consumer sentiment had been falling since July 2007. 3 months later we were in recession. The pattern is always the same: Consumers feel the pain before it shows up in the indices. The market ignores them until it can't.
0:38

The S&P 500 just hit an all-time high. But consumer sentiment just hit an all-time low. Both happened in the same week. Think about this. On April 15, the S&P 500 closed above 7,000 for the first time in history. Traders were celebrating on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange. The Nasdaq posted its longest winning streak since 2009 - 12 consecutive days of gains. And 5 days earlier, the University of Michigan Consumer Sentiment Index dropped to 47.6. The LOWEST reading in the survey's 74 year HISTORY. Lower than the 2008 financial crisis. Lower than the COVID crash. Lower than the worst of the post-pandemic inflation surge. Lower than anything recorded since Harry Truman was president. Every single demographic group declined. Every age bracket. Every income level. Every political affiliation. Every component of the index (current conditions, future expectations, personal finances, buying conditions) ALL fell. 1 year inflation expectations spiked to 4.8%, up a full percentage point from March. That's the steepest single-month jump since April 2025. Business expectations crashed 20% in a single month. And 98% of the survey was completed BEFORE the ceasefire was announced. These people aren't pessimistic because of headlines. They're pessimistic because of their grocery bills, their gas prices, and their shrinking purchasing power. Meanwhile, Wall Street is throwing a party. Morgan Stanley's Mike Wilson went on CNBC and declared "the lows are in." He said the market is rotating back into pro-cyclical names and that we should expect things to "resolve constructively." Resolve constructively? The ceasefire expires Wednesday. Iran just re-closed the Strait of Hormuz AGAIN. Brent crude is back near $98. The US Navy is still blockading Iranian ports. Peace talks in Pakistan collapsed over the weekend after Iran refused to abandon its nuclear program. And the stock market is priced for a happy ending. Here's what 45 years on Wall Street have taught me: When markets and consumers disagree this violently, one of them is wrong. The S&P 500 is trading at all-time highs because 7 mega cap tech stocks (powered by AI narratives) account for nearly half the index's market cap. Those stocks run on their own dynamic independent of anything, including the war in Iran. That's a market being dragged to record highs by a handful of names while the real economy deteriorates underneath. Can you call this a healthy market? Software stocks are down 28% this year. The broader SaaS index is down nearly 40%. Private credit is imploding. Gas prices are surging. Consumer buying conditions for big-ticket items are collapsing. But the S&P hit 7,000 so everything must be fine. I remember in 2000, consumer sentiment peaked in January. Two months later the Nasdaq topped. Within a year it had lost 39%. In 2007, the S&P 500 hit its record in October. Consumer sentiment had been falling since July 2007. 3 months later we were in recession. The pattern is always the same: Consumers feel the pain before it shows up in the indices. The market ignores them until it can't.

George Noble

26,409 views • 4 months ago

🚨 SOMETHING VERY BAD IS HAPPENING The top 10 stocks now make up around 40% of the S&P 500 AI-related stocks (direct AI + infrastructure) account for up to 50% The market has basically turned into one massive bet on artificial intelligence This is an overvalued AI bubble that's already inflating the entire market Big Tech - Microsoft, Amazon, Google, Meta, and others - has been pouring massive amounts of money into AI infrastructure throughout 2025-2026 For 2026, projected hyperscaler capex is around $560-725 billion, with some estimates as high as $800-900 billion That's comparable to the telecom boom of the late '90s The money is flowing into data centers, chips, and energy infrastructure But here's the problem - monetization is lagging way behind Many AI projects, including OpenAI, are still losing money Competition is growing with open-source models, while regulatory risks and energy constraints are also becoming bigger issues Investors are paying for a future trillion-dollar AI market that still isn't showing up in actual profits Stocks have been climbing on expectations, not current results On top of that, the Shiller CAPE Ratio is sitting around 41x To put that into perspective: That's one of the highest readings in history, getting close to the peak of the 2000 dot-com bubble at 43x+ That's why I think the S&P 500 could eventually drop 20-30% or more, similar to what happened in 2000-2002, when the index lost nearly 50%, although today's market is more mature It's gonna be painful, there'll be a crash, and there'll be temporary damage But AI technology is real The models will keep getting better, computing will get cheaper, and adoption will continue to grow. The infrastructure being built today isn't going anywhere After crash, AI will keep transforming the economy on a much healthier and more sustainable foundation, without all the speculative excess I've said this before, and everything is still playing out exactly according to plan Turn on notifications. If you're not following me yet, you might realize later that it was a mistake because I warned you Bookmark this. The next phase is gonna be very important
0:29

🚨 SOMETHING VERY BAD IS HAPPENING The top 10 stocks now make up around 40% of the S&P 500 AI-related stocks (direct AI + infrastructure) account for up to 50% The market has basically turned into one massive bet on artificial intelligence This is an overvalued AI bubble that's already inflating the entire market Big Tech - Microsoft, Amazon, Google, Meta, and others - has been pouring massive amounts of money into AI infrastructure throughout 2025-2026 For 2026, projected hyperscaler capex is around $560-725 billion, with some estimates as high as $800-900 billion That's comparable to the telecom boom of the late '90s The money is flowing into data centers, chips, and energy infrastructure But here's the problem - monetization is lagging way behind Many AI projects, including OpenAI, are still losing money Competition is growing with open-source models, while regulatory risks and energy constraints are also becoming bigger issues Investors are paying for a future trillion-dollar AI market that still isn't showing up in actual profits Stocks have been climbing on expectations, not current results On top of that, the Shiller CAPE Ratio is sitting around 41x To put that into perspective: That's one of the highest readings in history, getting close to the peak of the 2000 dot-com bubble at 43x+ That's why I think the S&P 500 could eventually drop 20-30% or more, similar to what happened in 2000-2002, when the index lost nearly 50%, although today's market is more mature It's gonna be painful, there'll be a crash, and there'll be temporary damage But AI technology is real The models will keep getting better, computing will get cheaper, and adoption will continue to grow. The infrastructure being built today isn't going anywhere After crash, AI will keep transforming the economy on a much healthier and more sustainable foundation, without all the speculative excess I've said this before, and everything is still playing out exactly according to plan Turn on notifications. If you're not following me yet, you might realize later that it was a mistake because I warned you Bookmark this. The next phase is gonna be very important

Leni

69,875 views • 2 months ago

Bill Gates funded fake butter made out of fossil fuels has officially hit the market and is being used in products right now The company was able to use the GRAS loophole to start selling. They self-affirmed GRAS (Generally Recognized as Safe) status from the FDA “A new butter is hitting the market that's not made from cow's milk but rather fossil fuels. The biotech company Savor uses a petrochemical process to pull gas from the air and turn it into an animal-free butter. The process, called Fischer-Tropsch synthesis, turns carbon monoxide and hydrogen into hydrocarbons that will then be infused with oxygen to make fatty acids. People have come up with alternative food, but what we're seeing is that it's hard to get more than a small market share, and those foods just don't taste the same. Savor made an advance in the chemistry. It's ultra-different in terms of the environmental footprint, but it's as good as those real animal fats. It's a totally non-agricultural method for producing food. The fats that Savor makes are made by a thermochemical process. They are the only foods in the world so far that are made entirely without photosynthesis. If you aren't already shocked, you'll definitely be surprised to learn that the Germans were attempting to do something very similar in 1939. AP News published an article close to a century ago about how German scientists were developing a way to turn coal into margarine using the exact same Fischer-Tropsch process. While they never followed through with production because extracting the edible oil was inefficient, history may end up repeating itself with Savor Foods.” As of today products featuring the “butter” became available, such as handcrafted vegan chocolates at select patisseries in San Francisco. Broader retail distribution is still scaling, with joint development agreements underway with CPG companies for wider food applications (e.g., replacing cocoa butter or lard) Expansion Plans: Savor is building toward price parity with traditional dairy butter through a new pilot facility in Batavia, Illinois (producing several metric tons). More recipes and menu items are rolling out throughout 2025, with potential for full consumer market entry in 2026 as production ramps up
1:33

Bill Gates funded fake butter made out of fossil fuels has officially hit the market and is being used in products right now The company was able to use the GRAS loophole to start selling. They self-affirmed GRAS (Generally Recognized as Safe) status from the FDA “A new butter is hitting the market that's not made from cow's milk but rather fossil fuels. The biotech company Savor uses a petrochemical process to pull gas from the air and turn it into an animal-free butter. The process, called Fischer-Tropsch synthesis, turns carbon monoxide and hydrogen into hydrocarbons that will then be infused with oxygen to make fatty acids. People have come up with alternative food, but what we're seeing is that it's hard to get more than a small market share, and those foods just don't taste the same. Savor made an advance in the chemistry. It's ultra-different in terms of the environmental footprint, but it's as good as those real animal fats. It's a totally non-agricultural method for producing food. The fats that Savor makes are made by a thermochemical process. They are the only foods in the world so far that are made entirely without photosynthesis. If you aren't already shocked, you'll definitely be surprised to learn that the Germans were attempting to do something very similar in 1939. AP News published an article close to a century ago about how German scientists were developing a way to turn coal into margarine using the exact same Fischer-Tropsch process. While they never followed through with production because extracting the edible oil was inefficient, history may end up repeating itself with Savor Foods.” As of today products featuring the “butter” became available, such as handcrafted vegan chocolates at select patisseries in San Francisco. Broader retail distribution is still scaling, with joint development agreements underway with CPG companies for wider food applications (e.g., replacing cocoa butter or lard) Expansion Plans: Savor is building toward price parity with traditional dairy butter through a new pilot facility in Batavia, Illinois (producing several metric tons). More recipes and menu items are rolling out throughout 2025, with potential for full consumer market entry in 2026 as production ramps up

Wall Street Apes

271,404 views • 9 months ago

My Bitcoin Treasury discussion with Joe Burnett, MSBA. 0:00 – Intro 1:00 – First priority as Director of Bitcoin Strategy 3:11 – Should Bitcoin companies copy MSTR’s preferreds? 5:02 – Structuring credit: BTC Ratings from 2 to 10 6:25 – Long-term CAGR for Bitcoin vs. S&P 500 8:28 – Why Bitcoin has fewer risks than stocks 10:36 – The global index with no counterparty risk 15:14 – Is Bitcoin a global productivity index? 16:56 – Will MSTR join the S&P 500? 18:14 – Why Vanguard owns MSTR 19:23 – Unlocking passive capital for Bitcoin 21:14 – Why BTC companies magnetize capital 23:24 – Mag 7 adoption playbook: fast vs. slow 25:47 – Most CEOs don’t want the money 27:15 – Who should adopt Bitcoin—and who won’t 29:20 – Why MSTR is going all-in on preferreds 31:21 – Preferreds are better than convertibles 32:32 – Will BTC companies still trade above NAV in bear markets? 34:09 – Why 2022 was a crypto-catalyzed bear market 35:14 – The difference between 1.1x and 100x leverage 37:07 – How to defend BTC NAV with credit instruments 39:14 – How to create a Bitcoin short squeeze 41:20 – Why shorts don’t have the courage 43:20 – The future of BTC-backed credit and equity 45:04 – A new theory of Bitcoin corporate finance 49:30 – Copy MSTR: it’s good for everyone 50:26 – Harvard’s outdated Bitcoin case study 52:16 – Why the smartest firms are making bad moves 54:16 – Why academics ignore Strategy’s success 55:15 – How the world could look in four years 57:09 – Final thoughts and wrap-up
57:21

My Bitcoin Treasury discussion with Joe Burnett, MSBA. 0:00 – Intro 1:00 – First priority as Director of Bitcoin Strategy 3:11 – Should Bitcoin companies copy MSTR’s preferreds? 5:02 – Structuring credit: BTC Ratings from 2 to 10 6:25 – Long-term CAGR for Bitcoin vs. S&P 500 8:28 – Why Bitcoin has fewer risks than stocks 10:36 – The global index with no counterparty risk 15:14 – Is Bitcoin a global productivity index? 16:56 – Will MSTR join the S&P 500? 18:14 – Why Vanguard owns MSTR 19:23 – Unlocking passive capital for Bitcoin 21:14 – Why BTC companies magnetize capital 23:24 – Mag 7 adoption playbook: fast vs. slow 25:47 – Most CEOs don’t want the money 27:15 – Who should adopt Bitcoin—and who won’t 29:20 – Why MSTR is going all-in on preferreds 31:21 – Preferreds are better than convertibles 32:32 – Will BTC companies still trade above NAV in bear markets? 34:09 – Why 2022 was a crypto-catalyzed bear market 35:14 – The difference between 1.1x and 100x leverage 37:07 – How to defend BTC NAV with credit instruments 39:14 – How to create a Bitcoin short squeeze 41:20 – Why shorts don’t have the courage 43:20 – The future of BTC-backed credit and equity 45:04 – A new theory of Bitcoin corporate finance 49:30 – Copy MSTR: it’s good for everyone 50:26 – Harvard’s outdated Bitcoin case study 52:16 – Why the smartest firms are making bad moves 54:16 – Why academics ignore Strategy’s success 55:15 – How the world could look in four years 57:09 – Final thoughts and wrap-up

Michael Saylor

484,592 views • 1 year ago

Physical Gold → Equities Rebalancing Executed! Credit Cards → Gold → Cash → Mutual Funds Sold all my Vedhani Collection from P.N.Gadgil of 231.5 gms 995 gold to Kalyan Jewellers, who bought it at a 3% deduction from the day's rate. I accumulated this gold over several years, and my average purchase price was around ₹10,000/gm, while I sold it at approximately ₹15,000/gm. All gold was bought at discount from various platforms. (Capital gains tax applies based on the respective purchase dates.) On top of the appreciation, the credit card points valued about 15% conservatively on the buying price earned while buying the gold have funded my travels over the last many years and should comfortably fund another year(s) or so of travel. Post melting, the purity came to around 99.4%. (Kalyan may not buy back at just a 3% deduction if this happens, so it's advisable to carry some 999-purity gold along for melting when selling, helping keep the overall purity above 99.5%.) Interestingly, the final weight was marginally higher. The sale proceeds were credited to my bank account the next day after the 3% deduction. I then invested the proceeds into the UTI Nifty 50 Index Fund. I have already held this fund for more than five years, so this was simply a top-up. (It does have a slightly higher expense ratio than some other index funds but the tracking error is lower) Why a domestic index fund? For the last two-plus years, I've been allocating most of my investments to gold. While gold has delivered spectacular returns during this period, the Nifty 50 has generated almost no returns over the same timeframe. I felt this was a good opportunity to buy into equities at roughly two year old price levels and rebalance my portfolio. (PS: I already hold ~20% of my portfolio in an US index since several years) PS: Bought some of the gold back today already at a lower rate than I sold it at as there were some great deals. Follow me Akash for credit card strategies / optimization & Gold Deals 🪙 for amazing gold deals. ❤️|♻️ for good karma. 😊
0:35

Physical Gold → Equities Rebalancing Executed! Credit Cards → Gold → Cash → Mutual Funds Sold all my Vedhani Collection from P.N.Gadgil of 231.5 gms 995 gold to Kalyan Jewellers, who bought it at a 3% deduction from the day's rate. I accumulated this gold over several years, and my average purchase price was around ₹10,000/gm, while I sold it at approximately ₹15,000/gm. All gold was bought at discount from various platforms. (Capital gains tax applies based on the respective purchase dates.) On top of the appreciation, the credit card points valued about 15% conservatively on the buying price earned while buying the gold have funded my travels over the last many years and should comfortably fund another year(s) or so of travel. Post melting, the purity came to around 99.4%. (Kalyan may not buy back at just a 3% deduction if this happens, so it's advisable to carry some 999-purity gold along for melting when selling, helping keep the overall purity above 99.5%.) Interestingly, the final weight was marginally higher. The sale proceeds were credited to my bank account the next day after the 3% deduction. I then invested the proceeds into the UTI Nifty 50 Index Fund. I have already held this fund for more than five years, so this was simply a top-up. (It does have a slightly higher expense ratio than some other index funds but the tracking error is lower) Why a domestic index fund? For the last two-plus years, I've been allocating most of my investments to gold. While gold has delivered spectacular returns during this period, the Nifty 50 has generated almost no returns over the same timeframe. I felt this was a good opportunity to buy into equities at roughly two year old price levels and rebalance my portfolio. (PS: I already hold ~20% of my portfolio in an US index since several years) PS: Bought some of the gold back today already at a lower rate than I sold it at as there were some great deals. Follow me Akash for credit card strategies / optimization & Gold Deals 🪙 for amazing gold deals. ❤️|♻️ for good karma. 😊

Akash

226,014 views • 2 months ago

The largest IPO in history is not a win. It's the bell at the top. SpaceX is raising $75B at a $1.75T valuation. 3 times bigger than the previous record IPO. Bigger than the GDP of most countries. Every major index is racing to rewrite its rules to absorb it. That's a synchronized push to force trillions in passive money into one listing. At the most fragile setup for markets in two decades. Below's the convergence: Index providers aren't quietly tweaking rules in the background. They're proposing wholesale rewrites RIGHT NOW: → S&P Dow Jones reviewing the profitability requirement that stood since 2002. Up for waiver. → Nasdaq cutting seasoning windows from 90 trading days down to 15. → FTSE Russell going further. Down to 5. S&P 500 public comment window closes May 28. Potential implementation? June 8. Four days before SpaceX trades. Three of the most important benchmarks on Earth. Restructured in the same window. For the same listing. That's the setup. Here's what happens next: When you force a $1.75 trillion stock into an index, the index doesn't print new money to buy it. It sells other names to make room. Mechanical selling of NVDA, AAPL, MSFT, AMZN. The current leaders absorb forced sell-pressure the moment SPCX enters. But that's just the warmup. SpaceX is floating only 5% of its shares. Everything else stays with insiders, early investors, employees. Lockup expires in two stages: → 90 days post-IPO: early September → 180 days post-IPO: early December Look at where those dates land. September falls inside the worst statistical window in the entire 4-year cycle. May through October. 15 of the last 16 midterm election years went red in that window. September is the deep end of it. December lands right after the November midterm vote. Policy uncertainty resolves. Big money rotates fast. None of this is happening in a healthy market. This is landing on top of: → 30-year Treasury yield above 5%. Last time that showed up was July 2007. Three months before the market peak. Twelve months before Lehman. → $2 trillion AI cloud backlog where over half of demand is OpenAI and Anthropic recycling investor money back to Microsoft, Google, Amazon. → Equities at the most overvalued level in history. Not close to it. Actually there. Here is the sequence loading: June 12: SPCX prints. Forced passive buying overwhelms reality. Late June: mechanical rebalancing starts selling everything else in Nasdaq 100. Early September: first lockup expires. Insiders sell into the artificially inflated bid. October: middle of the historically worst window for stocks in midterm years. Early December: second lockup expires. Bigger wave. Four catalysts. One direction. Not a forecast. A calendar. The setup couldn't be more loaded if it tried. What do you actually do? You can't fight the IPO. SPCX will probably rip on day one. The passive bid is too mechanical to stop. But you can stop being long everything else. My system flags the exact moment the market shifts from CAUTION to DANGER. You'll be warned before it hits, like always. Many people will wish they had followed me sooner Save this post. Watch the June 8 comment window. Position accordingly.
0:28

The largest IPO in history is not a win. It's the bell at the top. SpaceX is raising $75B at a $1.75T valuation. 3 times bigger than the previous record IPO. Bigger than the GDP of most countries. Every major index is racing to rewrite its rules to absorb it. That's a synchronized push to force trillions in passive money into one listing. At the most fragile setup for markets in two decades. Below's the convergence: Index providers aren't quietly tweaking rules in the background. They're proposing wholesale rewrites RIGHT NOW: → S&P Dow Jones reviewing the profitability requirement that stood since 2002. Up for waiver. → Nasdaq cutting seasoning windows from 90 trading days down to 15. → FTSE Russell going further. Down to 5. S&P 500 public comment window closes May 28. Potential implementation? June 8. Four days before SpaceX trades. Three of the most important benchmarks on Earth. Restructured in the same window. For the same listing. That's the setup. Here's what happens next: When you force a $1.75 trillion stock into an index, the index doesn't print new money to buy it. It sells other names to make room. Mechanical selling of NVDA, AAPL, MSFT, AMZN. The current leaders absorb forced sell-pressure the moment SPCX enters. But that's just the warmup. SpaceX is floating only 5% of its shares. Everything else stays with insiders, early investors, employees. Lockup expires in two stages: → 90 days post-IPO: early September → 180 days post-IPO: early December Look at where those dates land. September falls inside the worst statistical window in the entire 4-year cycle. May through October. 15 of the last 16 midterm election years went red in that window. September is the deep end of it. December lands right after the November midterm vote. Policy uncertainty resolves. Big money rotates fast. None of this is happening in a healthy market. This is landing on top of: → 30-year Treasury yield above 5%. Last time that showed up was July 2007. Three months before the market peak. Twelve months before Lehman. → $2 trillion AI cloud backlog where over half of demand is OpenAI and Anthropic recycling investor money back to Microsoft, Google, Amazon. → Equities at the most overvalued level in history. Not close to it. Actually there. Here is the sequence loading: June 12: SPCX prints. Forced passive buying overwhelms reality. Late June: mechanical rebalancing starts selling everything else in Nasdaq 100. Early September: first lockup expires. Insiders sell into the artificially inflated bid. October: middle of the historically worst window for stocks in midterm years. Early December: second lockup expires. Bigger wave. Four catalysts. One direction. Not a forecast. A calendar. The setup couldn't be more loaded if it tried. What do you actually do? You can't fight the IPO. SPCX will probably rip on day one. The passive bid is too mechanical to stop. But you can stop being long everything else. My system flags the exact moment the market shifts from CAUTION to DANGER. You'll be warned before it hits, like always. Many people will wish they had followed me sooner Save this post. Watch the June 8 comment window. Position accordingly.

Himanshu Kumar

42,059 views • 2 months ago

Big Tech just ran out of money building AI and what they're doing to cover it up should be illegal. Google, Amazon, Microsoft, and Meta are spending a combined $700 BILLION this year on AI infrastructure. This eats up 94% of their total operating cash flow. The richest companies in human history are almost broke. And instead of slowing down, they're covering it up with the biggest financial engineering operation since 2008: Google just sold $80 billion in stock to fund AI infrastructure. That was their first equity raise in 20 YEARS. The last time Google needed to sell stock, YouTube didn't even exist. Sundar Pichai admitted the thing keeping him up at night is "compute capacity." The company that prints $100 billion a year in ad revenue just told Wall Street it isn't enough anymore. Amazon's free cash flow is projected to go NEGATIVE this year for the first time ever. Morgan Stanley estimates a $17 billion deficit and Bank of America says $28 billion. The most profitable logistics machine on Earth is about to burn more cash than it generates, and they quietly filed with the SEC saying they may need to raise even more debt and equity to keep building. All four hyperscalers are now borrowing hundreds of billions in bonds to keep the AI buildout alive. These were the most cash-rich companies in human history, and they're leveraging themselves to the teeth to build infrastructure that nobody has proven will generate enough revenue to pay for itself. And the cracks are already starting to show: Broadcom makes the custom AI chips that power Google, Meta, OpenAI, and Anthropic. This week their AI revenue TRIPLED year over year, sales grew 48%, and profits smashed every Wall Street estimate. The reward for all of that was $320 billion in value erased in a single trading session. Their CEO Hock Tan went on the earnings call and exposed three things about the AI industry: Google is already shopping for cheaper AI chip alternatives, broadcom abandoned its strategy of selling complete AI systems and is now retreating to selling bare chips at lower margins. And despite supposedly "unprecedented demand," Tan refused to raise his full-year forecast, which tells you everything about what he's actually seeing behind the curtain. Wall Street heard all three and hit the sell button so hard it dragged AMD, Intel, and the entire chip sector down with it. When a company triples its AI revenue and gets punished because tripling isn't fast enough, the expectations have left the atmosphere entirely. And here's the really scary part... These companies ARE your retirement account. Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Google, Meta, and Nvidia make up roughly 30% of the S&P 500. If you have a 401k or an index fund, you are already exposed to this bet whether you chose to be or not. Every single one of these companies is telling you AI will generate trillions in revenue. But right now the math says they're spending trillions FIRST and hoping the revenue shows up later. If the revenue catches up, this becomes the greatest infrastructure buildout in human history. Bigger than railroads and bigger than the internet. If it doesn't, the companies that make up a third of the American stock market just leveraged their balance sheets into the largest write-down cycle since 2000. And unlike the dot-com crash, this time the bubble companies aren't random startups with no revenue. They're the backbone of the entire global economy.
2:08

Big Tech just ran out of money building AI and what they're doing to cover it up should be illegal. Google, Amazon, Microsoft, and Meta are spending a combined $700 BILLION this year on AI infrastructure. This eats up 94% of their total operating cash flow. The richest companies in human history are almost broke. And instead of slowing down, they're covering it up with the biggest financial engineering operation since 2008: Google just sold $80 billion in stock to fund AI infrastructure. That was their first equity raise in 20 YEARS. The last time Google needed to sell stock, YouTube didn't even exist. Sundar Pichai admitted the thing keeping him up at night is "compute capacity." The company that prints $100 billion a year in ad revenue just told Wall Street it isn't enough anymore. Amazon's free cash flow is projected to go NEGATIVE this year for the first time ever. Morgan Stanley estimates a $17 billion deficit and Bank of America says $28 billion. The most profitable logistics machine on Earth is about to burn more cash than it generates, and they quietly filed with the SEC saying they may need to raise even more debt and equity to keep building. All four hyperscalers are now borrowing hundreds of billions in bonds to keep the AI buildout alive. These were the most cash-rich companies in human history, and they're leveraging themselves to the teeth to build infrastructure that nobody has proven will generate enough revenue to pay for itself. And the cracks are already starting to show: Broadcom makes the custom AI chips that power Google, Meta, OpenAI, and Anthropic. This week their AI revenue TRIPLED year over year, sales grew 48%, and profits smashed every Wall Street estimate. The reward for all of that was $320 billion in value erased in a single trading session. Their CEO Hock Tan went on the earnings call and exposed three things about the AI industry: Google is already shopping for cheaper AI chip alternatives, broadcom abandoned its strategy of selling complete AI systems and is now retreating to selling bare chips at lower margins. And despite supposedly "unprecedented demand," Tan refused to raise his full-year forecast, which tells you everything about what he's actually seeing behind the curtain. Wall Street heard all three and hit the sell button so hard it dragged AMD, Intel, and the entire chip sector down with it. When a company triples its AI revenue and gets punished because tripling isn't fast enough, the expectations have left the atmosphere entirely. And here's the really scary part... These companies ARE your retirement account. Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Google, Meta, and Nvidia make up roughly 30% of the S&P 500. If you have a 401k or an index fund, you are already exposed to this bet whether you chose to be or not. Every single one of these companies is telling you AI will generate trillions in revenue. But right now the math says they're spending trillions FIRST and hoping the revenue shows up later. If the revenue catches up, this becomes the greatest infrastructure buildout in human history. Bigger than railroads and bigger than the internet. If it doesn't, the companies that make up a third of the American stock market just leveraged their balance sheets into the largest write-down cycle since 2000. And unlike the dot-com crash, this time the bubble companies aren't random startups with no revenue. They're the backbone of the entire global economy.

Ricardo

228,416 views • 2 months ago