Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

На главную

Meta just filed SEC documents tying executive pay to a $9 trillion valuation by 2031. $9 TRILLION. The company is worth $1.5 trillion today. That means they need a 500% increase in 5 years. And they're not the only ones playing this game. Tesla shareholders approved a $1 trillion...

gnoble79's profile picture

George Noble

109,479 subscribers

279,736 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад •via X (Twitter)

Новости и политикаНаука и технологииФинансы
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

Tesla is a $1.3 trillion company that sold fewer cars this year than last year. And fewer last year than the year before. That should tell you everything you need to know. 2 consecutive years of declining deliveries. Down 9% in 2025 to 1.63 million vehicles. The steepest annual drop in the company's history. And 2026 is starting even worse - US sales down 17% in January, Europe down 44% across major markets. France down 42%. Netherlands down 67%. Norway down 88%. BYD passed them as the global EV leader. In the UK, BYD outsold Tesla 2 to 1 last month. The brand is in FREEFALL. Brand Finance measured a 36% collapse in Tesla's brand value last year - down to $27.6 billion, less than half its 2023 peak. In California, their most important US market, share dropped from 11.6% to 9.9%. And the stock trades at 365 times trailing earnings. Let me say that differently: Tesla earned $3.8 billion last year. The market is valuing those earnings at $1.3 trillion. You are paying $365 for every dollar this company earns. The bull case has completely abandoned the car business. It's all robotaxis and Optimus robots now. They discontinued the Model S and Model X. They told investors on the last earnings call to stop focusing on vehicle deliveries and start thinking about "transportation as a service." So in other words: please ignore the business we actually have and value us on the business we MIGHT have someday. Trust me, every time management tells you to look over there instead of over here... LOOK OVER HERE. The car business is deteriorating. Margins are compressing. Competition from BYD, Volkswagen, and a dozen Chinese manufacturers is intensifying quarter by quarter. The $7,500 federal EV tax credit is gone, which effectively raised the price of every Tesla overnight. And instead of addressing any of that, they're doubling capex to $20 billion this year - almost entirely directed at AI and autonomous driving infrastructure. So you have a company with shrinking revenue, shrinking deliveries, a damaged brand, and intensifying competition pouring $20 billion into a technology that hasn't been proven at commercial scale. On 365 times earnings. Even if you give them the most generous robotaxi assumptions imaginable (full regulatory approval, nationwide deployment, dominant market share) you still can't justify this valuation. The present value of that optionality doesn't come close to $1.3 trillion when the core business is going backwards. I think this stock goes down 90% from here. Not because Tesla is worthless. They'll sell cars. The energy storage business has potential. But the equity is priced for a future that isn't coming on the timeline the market expects. A $37 stock. That's where the math takes you when you strip out the narrative and price what actually exists. I know that sounds extreme. But 45 years of doing this has taught me something: When you can see the seams on the fastball, you SWING. I can see the seams.
1:40

Tesla is a $1.3 trillion company that sold fewer cars this year than last year. And fewer last year than the year before. That should tell you everything you need to know. 2 consecutive years of declining deliveries. Down 9% in 2025 to 1.63 million vehicles. The steepest annual drop in the company's history. And 2026 is starting even worse - US sales down 17% in January, Europe down 44% across major markets. France down 42%. Netherlands down 67%. Norway down 88%. BYD passed them as the global EV leader. In the UK, BYD outsold Tesla 2 to 1 last month. The brand is in FREEFALL. Brand Finance measured a 36% collapse in Tesla's brand value last year - down to $27.6 billion, less than half its 2023 peak. In California, their most important US market, share dropped from 11.6% to 9.9%. And the stock trades at 365 times trailing earnings. Let me say that differently: Tesla earned $3.8 billion last year. The market is valuing those earnings at $1.3 trillion. You are paying $365 for every dollar this company earns. The bull case has completely abandoned the car business. It's all robotaxis and Optimus robots now. They discontinued the Model S and Model X. They told investors on the last earnings call to stop focusing on vehicle deliveries and start thinking about "transportation as a service." So in other words: please ignore the business we actually have and value us on the business we MIGHT have someday. Trust me, every time management tells you to look over there instead of over here... LOOK OVER HERE. The car business is deteriorating. Margins are compressing. Competition from BYD, Volkswagen, and a dozen Chinese manufacturers is intensifying quarter by quarter. The $7,500 federal EV tax credit is gone, which effectively raised the price of every Tesla overnight. And instead of addressing any of that, they're doubling capex to $20 billion this year - almost entirely directed at AI and autonomous driving infrastructure. So you have a company with shrinking revenue, shrinking deliveries, a damaged brand, and intensifying competition pouring $20 billion into a technology that hasn't been proven at commercial scale. On 365 times earnings. Even if you give them the most generous robotaxi assumptions imaginable (full regulatory approval, nationwide deployment, dominant market share) you still can't justify this valuation. The present value of that optionality doesn't come close to $1.3 trillion when the core business is going backwards. I think this stock goes down 90% from here. Not because Tesla is worthless. They'll sell cars. The energy storage business has potential. But the equity is priced for a future that isn't coming on the timeline the market expects. A $37 stock. That's where the math takes you when you strip out the narrative and price what actually exists. I know that sounds extreme. But 45 years of doing this has taught me something: When you can see the seams on the fastball, you SWING. I can see the seams.

George Noble

529,597 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

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

228,090 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

I just sat down with Gordon Johnson and we did something that apparently nobody on Wall Street wants to do anymore: We valued Tesla like an actual BUSINESS. Not a narrative or a promise about what might happen in 2030. We took each of Tesla's 4 business segments, assigned them the valuation of the best comparable company in each category, and added it all up. I want to see how the Tesla cult argues against what we found out... Segment one: Optimus robots. Tesla's humanoid robots are teleoperated. There are videos of them falling over at exhibitions. They can barely serve popcorn. But let's be generous. Let's give Tesla the valuation of Figure AI - a company that actually has working AI robots you can buy today. Figure AI is valued at $39 billion. On Tesla's 3.75 billion shares outstanding, that's $10 a share. Segment two: FSD and robotaxis. Waymo has completed over 127 million fully autonomous miles without a driver behind the wheel. They did 15 million paid rides in 2025 alone. They operate commercially across 6 US cities. Tesla has done effectively ZERO reported fully autonomous miles at scale. But let's give Tesla Waymo's valuation of $100 billion anyway. That's $27 a share. So far we're at $37 for the two businesses the bulls say justify the entire market cap. Segment three: The auto business. Ford sold 4.5 million cars in 2025 and grew sales. Tesla sold 1.6 million and it was the second consecutive year of declining deliveries. But let's give Tesla Ford's market cap of $51 billion. That's $13 a share. Segment four: Energy. LG Electronics did $14.5 billion in gross profit last year. Tesla's energy business did $3.8 billion. But let's give Tesla LG's market cap of $14 billion. That's $4 a share. Add it all up: $10 + $27 + $13 + $4 = $54 a share That's being GENEROUS. That's assuming Tesla is best in class in every single segment. Better robots than the company with actual working robots. As good at autonomy as the company with 127 million autonomous miles. Worth as much as a car company that sells 3x more vehicles. $54. The stock is $387. The difference is literally $1.2 TRILLION. That is what the market is currently paying for Elon Musk's promises. Promises that he literally just pushed out again on the earnings call two days ago. And when the stock price finally breaks - the lawsuits are going to cascade. Right now, the stock price is keeping those lawsuits at bay. People don't sue when they're making money. But when the stock drops to $100, $80, $60 - those same owners are going to want a lot more than their FSD money back. The positive reflexivity that carried this stock runs in reverse. Cash flow goes negative. Market share keeps declining. The SpaceX IPO pulls attention and capital away. Momentum investors move on. And then the math that Gordon and I just walked through becomes the ONLY thing left. $54 if you're generous. $25 if you're not.
4:59

I just sat down with Gordon Johnson and we did something that apparently nobody on Wall Street wants to do anymore: We valued Tesla like an actual BUSINESS. Not a narrative or a promise about what might happen in 2030. We took each of Tesla's 4 business segments, assigned them the valuation of the best comparable company in each category, and added it all up. I want to see how the Tesla cult argues against what we found out... Segment one: Optimus robots. Tesla's humanoid robots are teleoperated. There are videos of them falling over at exhibitions. They can barely serve popcorn. But let's be generous. Let's give Tesla the valuation of Figure AI - a company that actually has working AI robots you can buy today. Figure AI is valued at $39 billion. On Tesla's 3.75 billion shares outstanding, that's $10 a share. Segment two: FSD and robotaxis. Waymo has completed over 127 million fully autonomous miles without a driver behind the wheel. They did 15 million paid rides in 2025 alone. They operate commercially across 6 US cities. Tesla has done effectively ZERO reported fully autonomous miles at scale. But let's give Tesla Waymo's valuation of $100 billion anyway. That's $27 a share. So far we're at $37 for the two businesses the bulls say justify the entire market cap. Segment three: The auto business. Ford sold 4.5 million cars in 2025 and grew sales. Tesla sold 1.6 million and it was the second consecutive year of declining deliveries. But let's give Tesla Ford's market cap of $51 billion. That's $13 a share. Segment four: Energy. LG Electronics did $14.5 billion in gross profit last year. Tesla's energy business did $3.8 billion. But let's give Tesla LG's market cap of $14 billion. That's $4 a share. Add it all up: $10 + $27 + $13 + $4 = $54 a share That's being GENEROUS. That's assuming Tesla is best in class in every single segment. Better robots than the company with actual working robots. As good at autonomy as the company with 127 million autonomous miles. Worth as much as a car company that sells 3x more vehicles. $54. The stock is $387. The difference is literally $1.2 TRILLION. That is what the market is currently paying for Elon Musk's promises. Promises that he literally just pushed out again on the earnings call two days ago. And when the stock price finally breaks - the lawsuits are going to cascade. Right now, the stock price is keeping those lawsuits at bay. People don't sue when they're making money. But when the stock drops to $100, $80, $60 - those same owners are going to want a lot more than their FSD money back. The positive reflexivity that carried this stock runs in reverse. Cash flow goes negative. Market share keeps declining. The SpaceX IPO pulls attention and capital away. Momentum investors move on. And then the math that Gordon and I just walked through becomes the ONLY thing left. $54 if you're generous. $25 if you're not.

George Noble

69,342 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

Last night was the biggest disaster in the history of Tesla. Let me walk you through what actually happened on that earnings call, because the headlines are doing you a disservice: Elon Musk got on the call and admitted (his words) that Hardware 3 "simply does not have the capability to achieve unsupervised FSD." He said he wished it were otherwise. He said the memory bandwidth is one-eighth of what Hardware 4 has. And that's the end of the conversation. Approximately 4 million Tesla vehicles on the road right now have Hardware 3. Many of those owners paid $8,000 to $15,000 for Full Self-Driving capability based on Musk's repeated promises (going back to 2016) that the hardware was sufficient for full autonomy. As recently as 2022, Musk was publicly assuring owners that HW3 had the processing power to get it done. BUT IT DIDN'T Those promises are now officially broken. The solution is a "discounted trade-in" toward a new car with Hardware 4. Not a refund or a free upgrade... A discount on buying ANOTHER Tesla. Investor Ross Gerber said it too - all HW3 owners got screwed, and with roughly 285,000 FSD purchasers affected, the potential liability runs into the BILLIONS. But that's not even the worst part. Musk was asked if the current FSD v14.3 was ready for unsupervised deployment. He said yes. Then immediately walked it back and admitted Tesla has "major architectural improvements" in the pipeline that would significantly improve safety. What he really means: the software isn't SAFE ENOUGH to deploy without a human watching. Full unsupervised FSD for consumer cars is pushed to Q4 2026. At the earliest... Maybe. How many times has this deadline been pushed? I've lost count. And trust me, I've seen a lot of broken promises. But this one takes the cake. Now let's talk about the numbers everyone is celebrating: Tesla reported $22.4 billion in revenue and $0.41 in non-GAAP earnings. A "double beat." The stock popped 4% after hours. Victory, right? WRONG Dig into the actual filing: The number one driver of operating income improvement wasn't cost reductions, wasn't volume growth, wasn't FSD revenue. It was - and Tesla listed this FIRST in their own shareholder letter - "one-time benefits related to warranty and tariffs." They released warranty reserves. They booked tariff refund windfalls. They stretched supplier payments by 10 days. They took on billions in new debt. Then they presented everything through non-GAAP metrics that strip out over $1 billion in stock-based compensation. GAAP net income was $477 million on $22.4 billion in revenue. That's a 2.1% net margin. On a $1.4 trillion market cap. Let me put that in perspective: 3.75 billion shares outstanding. Annualize the Q1 GAAP profit and you get roughly $1.9 billion. That's a trailing P/E ratio north of 700. Use the adjusted number - strip out stock comp, which is a REAL cost to shareholders through dilution - and you're still at around 250x earnings. All of this is extremely bad, but I didn't even talk about the CAPEX BOMB yet... 3 months ago, Tesla guided to "over $20 billion" in 2026 capital expenditure. Last night they raised it to over $25 billion. A $5 billion increase in a single quarter. That's 3x their historical annual capex run rate - $8.5 billion in 2025, $11.3 billion in 2024. The CFO confirmed on the call that Tesla expects NEGATIVE free cash flow for the rest of the year. So you have a company generating roughly $6 billion in annual free cash flow on a good year, and they're about to spend $25 billion. The math doesn't work. They will almost certainly need to issue equity. Which means dilution. Which means the $1.9 billion in annual earnings gets spread across even MORE shares. The core auto business is literally deteriorating in real time: Tesla delivered 358,000 vehicles in Q1 (missed estimates again). They produced 408,000. That's 50,000 cars sitting on lots that nobody bought. Inventory days jumped from 10 to 27 in just a few quarters. California (their most important US market) saw registrations crash 24% year over year. Their market share in the state fell from 9.2% to 7.7%. That's on top of a Q1 2025 that was ALREADY weak from Model Y retooling. They're declining off a decline. And here's what really kills the bull case... The entire valuation rests on robotaxis, Optimus robots, and autonomy. So let's put numbers on it: Waymo - the actual leader in autonomous driving with 15 million completed rides in 2025 alone, over 127 million autonomous miles driven, operating commercially across 6 US cities with plans to expand to 20 more - just raised $16 billion at a $126 billion valuation. That's the market's verdict on what the LEADING robotaxi company is worth. $126 billion. And Waymo is YEARS ahead of Tesla in actual deployment. Tesla has 3.75 billion shares outstanding. So even if you assign $126 billion in robotaxi value (giving Tesla full credit for matching Waymo despite being nowhere close) that's $33 a share. Add the auto business at generous auto-industry multiples, maybe $20 a share. Throw in energy storage and services, $10-15. Sum of the parts gets you to roughly $65-70 a share if you're feeling generous. Maybe $50 if you're not. The stock is $387. So what exactly are you paying for? You're paying for a STORY. You're paying for PROMISES that keep getting pushed back, technology that keeps falling short, and a business plan that requires spending $25 billion a year while the core product sells fewer units at declining margins in a market where California sales just fell 24% and the federal EV tax credit is gone. I managed the number one mutual fund in America. I founded two billion-dollar hedge funds. I've been doing this since 1981. And I am telling you: Tesla at $387 is one of the most egregious mispricings I have seen in my entire career. THE CRASH WILL BE EPIC
5:21

Last night was the biggest disaster in the history of Tesla. Let me walk you through what actually happened on that earnings call, because the headlines are doing you a disservice: Elon Musk got on the call and admitted (his words) that Hardware 3 "simply does not have the capability to achieve unsupervised FSD." He said he wished it were otherwise. He said the memory bandwidth is one-eighth of what Hardware 4 has. And that's the end of the conversation. Approximately 4 million Tesla vehicles on the road right now have Hardware 3. Many of those owners paid $8,000 to $15,000 for Full Self-Driving capability based on Musk's repeated promises (going back to 2016) that the hardware was sufficient for full autonomy. As recently as 2022, Musk was publicly assuring owners that HW3 had the processing power to get it done. BUT IT DIDN'T Those promises are now officially broken. The solution is a "discounted trade-in" toward a new car with Hardware 4. Not a refund or a free upgrade... A discount on buying ANOTHER Tesla. Investor Ross Gerber said it too - all HW3 owners got screwed, and with roughly 285,000 FSD purchasers affected, the potential liability runs into the BILLIONS. But that's not even the worst part. Musk was asked if the current FSD v14.3 was ready for unsupervised deployment. He said yes. Then immediately walked it back and admitted Tesla has "major architectural improvements" in the pipeline that would significantly improve safety. What he really means: the software isn't SAFE ENOUGH to deploy without a human watching. Full unsupervised FSD for consumer cars is pushed to Q4 2026. At the earliest... Maybe. How many times has this deadline been pushed? I've lost count. And trust me, I've seen a lot of broken promises. But this one takes the cake. Now let's talk about the numbers everyone is celebrating: Tesla reported $22.4 billion in revenue and $0.41 in non-GAAP earnings. A "double beat." The stock popped 4% after hours. Victory, right? WRONG Dig into the actual filing: The number one driver of operating income improvement wasn't cost reductions, wasn't volume growth, wasn't FSD revenue. It was - and Tesla listed this FIRST in their own shareholder letter - "one-time benefits related to warranty and tariffs." They released warranty reserves. They booked tariff refund windfalls. They stretched supplier payments by 10 days. They took on billions in new debt. Then they presented everything through non-GAAP metrics that strip out over $1 billion in stock-based compensation. GAAP net income was $477 million on $22.4 billion in revenue. That's a 2.1% net margin. On a $1.4 trillion market cap. Let me put that in perspective: 3.75 billion shares outstanding. Annualize the Q1 GAAP profit and you get roughly $1.9 billion. That's a trailing P/E ratio north of 700. Use the adjusted number - strip out stock comp, which is a REAL cost to shareholders through dilution - and you're still at around 250x earnings. All of this is extremely bad, but I didn't even talk about the CAPEX BOMB yet... 3 months ago, Tesla guided to "over $20 billion" in 2026 capital expenditure. Last night they raised it to over $25 billion. A $5 billion increase in a single quarter. That's 3x their historical annual capex run rate - $8.5 billion in 2025, $11.3 billion in 2024. The CFO confirmed on the call that Tesla expects NEGATIVE free cash flow for the rest of the year. So you have a company generating roughly $6 billion in annual free cash flow on a good year, and they're about to spend $25 billion. The math doesn't work. They will almost certainly need to issue equity. Which means dilution. Which means the $1.9 billion in annual earnings gets spread across even MORE shares. The core auto business is literally deteriorating in real time: Tesla delivered 358,000 vehicles in Q1 (missed estimates again). They produced 408,000. That's 50,000 cars sitting on lots that nobody bought. Inventory days jumped from 10 to 27 in just a few quarters. California (their most important US market) saw registrations crash 24% year over year. Their market share in the state fell from 9.2% to 7.7%. That's on top of a Q1 2025 that was ALREADY weak from Model Y retooling. They're declining off a decline. And here's what really kills the bull case... The entire valuation rests on robotaxis, Optimus robots, and autonomy. So let's put numbers on it: Waymo - the actual leader in autonomous driving with 15 million completed rides in 2025 alone, over 127 million autonomous miles driven, operating commercially across 6 US cities with plans to expand to 20 more - just raised $16 billion at a $126 billion valuation. That's the market's verdict on what the LEADING robotaxi company is worth. $126 billion. And Waymo is YEARS ahead of Tesla in actual deployment. Tesla has 3.75 billion shares outstanding. So even if you assign $126 billion in robotaxi value (giving Tesla full credit for matching Waymo despite being nowhere close) that's $33 a share. Add the auto business at generous auto-industry multiples, maybe $20 a share. Throw in energy storage and services, $10-15. Sum of the parts gets you to roughly $65-70 a share if you're feeling generous. Maybe $50 if you're not. The stock is $387. So what exactly are you paying for? You're paying for a STORY. You're paying for PROMISES that keep getting pushed back, technology that keeps falling short, and a business plan that requires spending $25 billion a year while the core product sells fewer units at declining margins in a market where California sales just fell 24% and the federal EV tax credit is gone. I managed the number one mutual fund in America. I founded two billion-dollar hedge funds. I've been doing this since 1981. And I am telling you: Tesla at $387 is one of the most egregious mispricings I have seen in my entire career. THE CRASH WILL BE EPIC

George Noble

1,225,064 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

THE SPACEX IPO IS BEING SOLD AS 4,000 NEW MILLIONAIRES AND A $1.8 TRILLION VALUATION. THE RISK IS IN ITS OWN FILING. 🇺🇸 The hype is real: stock options that paid below-market salaries for years are about to pay out big. But read what SpaceX told investors. Roughly one-fifth of its 2025 revenue came from government contracts. The filing warns that business is "subject to changes in policies, priorities, regulations, mandates, and funding levels." Translation: A meaningful slice of revenue depends on who's in power and how they feel about Elon. In June 2025, during the Musk-Trump feud, the President publicly threatened to cut Musk's contracts. That's not a footnote. That's the risk.
0:29

THE SPACEX IPO IS BEING SOLD AS 4,000 NEW MILLIONAIRES AND A $1.8 TRILLION VALUATION. THE RISK IS IN ITS OWN FILING. 🇺🇸 The hype is real: stock options that paid below-market salaries for years are about to pay out big. But read what SpaceX told investors. Roughly one-fifth of its 2025 revenue came from government contracts. The filing warns that business is "subject to changes in policies, priorities, regulations, mandates, and funding levels." Translation: A meaningful slice of revenue depends on who's in power and how they feel about Elon. In June 2025, during the Musk-Trump feud, the President publicly threatened to cut Musk's contracts. That's not a footnote. That's the risk.

Merlijn The Trader

86,096 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

Morgan Stanley just raised their 2027 AI capex forecast to $1.1 trillion and that number still doesn't include SpaceX or a lot of the other AI companies (Save this). When you factor those in, the real 2027 figure is probably closer to $1.5 trillion and AI lab inference revenue combined is tracking toward $300 billion in 2027. On its surface that ratio sounds alarming, spending $1.5 trillion in capex to generate $300 billion in revenue. But the framing collapses the moment you examine two things the bears consistently ignore, gross margins and the revenue trajectory. Gross margins on inference revenue are running at 60 to 70 percent. That means the $300 billion in inference revenue generates $180 to $210 billion in gross profit and that number compounds rapidly as utilization scales on infrastructure that is already built and paid for. The Capex is not being deployed against today's revenue but rather being deployed against a revenue trajectory that has shown no signs of decelerating. To understand how aggressive that trajectory actually is, consider that Morgan Stanley's $1.1 trillion hyperscaler forecast is nearly double what analysts projected for the same year just twelve months ago And they described the demand as inelastic, meaning it is not slowing down regardless of rising costs, tighter financing conditions or geopolitical risk. The AI industry ended 2025 tracking well over $200 billion in combined inference revenue and the growth rate since then has continued to accelerate rather than flatten. Anthropic alone scaled from negligible revenue to a $30 billion annualized run rate in approximately 18 months while OpenAI is tracking toward $280 billion in annual revenue by 2030 from $13 billion in 2025. There is also a structural reality in the capex number that the bears never account for. Roughly 35 percent of total AI spending goes toward training, building the next model generation which is not revenue-generating in the current period. That means only about 65 percent of the $1.5 trillion in capex is actually deployed against the inference infrastructure that earns revenue today. When you apply the 60 to 70 percent gross margin to the revenue that sits on top of that 65 percent figure, the economics look substantially better than the headline capex to revenue ratio implies. Every CEO who has been closest to this buildout has consistently underestimated it and Jensen Huang projected $1 trillion in AI capex two years ago and was called delusional. Dario Amodei said in early 2026 that AI revenues would reach the low hundreds of billions by 2028 and trillions before 2030 and given where Anthropic's own revenue trajectory is today, he is likely revising those numbers upward. The pattern here is consistent, every time someone models the revenue ceiling, the actual number breaks through it faster than expected. Come join Milk Road Pro for our full breakdown, the real unit economics of the AI inference buildout, how the capex to revenue ratio evolves over the next three years, and our entire AI thesis! Link below!
4:04

Morgan Stanley just raised their 2027 AI capex forecast to $1.1 trillion and that number still doesn't include SpaceX or a lot of the other AI companies (Save this). When you factor those in, the real 2027 figure is probably closer to $1.5 trillion and AI lab inference revenue combined is tracking toward $300 billion in 2027. On its surface that ratio sounds alarming, spending $1.5 trillion in capex to generate $300 billion in revenue. But the framing collapses the moment you examine two things the bears consistently ignore, gross margins and the revenue trajectory. Gross margins on inference revenue are running at 60 to 70 percent. That means the $300 billion in inference revenue generates $180 to $210 billion in gross profit and that number compounds rapidly as utilization scales on infrastructure that is already built and paid for. The Capex is not being deployed against today's revenue but rather being deployed against a revenue trajectory that has shown no signs of decelerating. To understand how aggressive that trajectory actually is, consider that Morgan Stanley's $1.1 trillion hyperscaler forecast is nearly double what analysts projected for the same year just twelve months ago And they described the demand as inelastic, meaning it is not slowing down regardless of rising costs, tighter financing conditions or geopolitical risk. The AI industry ended 2025 tracking well over $200 billion in combined inference revenue and the growth rate since then has continued to accelerate rather than flatten. Anthropic alone scaled from negligible revenue to a $30 billion annualized run rate in approximately 18 months while OpenAI is tracking toward $280 billion in annual revenue by 2030 from $13 billion in 2025. There is also a structural reality in the capex number that the bears never account for. Roughly 35 percent of total AI spending goes toward training, building the next model generation which is not revenue-generating in the current period. That means only about 65 percent of the $1.5 trillion in capex is actually deployed against the inference infrastructure that earns revenue today. When you apply the 60 to 70 percent gross margin to the revenue that sits on top of that 65 percent figure, the economics look substantially better than the headline capex to revenue ratio implies. Every CEO who has been closest to this buildout has consistently underestimated it and Jensen Huang projected $1 trillion in AI capex two years ago and was called delusional. Dario Amodei said in early 2026 that AI revenues would reach the low hundreds of billions by 2028 and trillions before 2030 and given where Anthropic's own revenue trajectory is today, he is likely revising those numbers upward. The pattern here is consistent, every time someone models the revenue ceiling, the actual number breaks through it faster than expected. Come join Milk Road Pro for our full breakdown, the real unit economics of the AI inference buildout, how the capex to revenue ratio evolves over the next three years, and our entire AI thesis! Link below!

Milk Road AI

21,141 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

Nebius will be a trillion dollar company (Save this). The neocloud market, purpose-built AI cloud infrastructure, separate from legacy hyperscalers generated roughly $25 billion in revenue in 2025, up 223% year over year. Synergy Research projects it will approach $400 billion by 2031, compounding at 58% annually one of the fastest sustained growth rates ever recorded for an infrastructure category of this scale. The CEO's explanation for why they win is worth understanding in detail. GPU compute is scarce and that part everyone knows but Nebius is not simply renting GPUs by the hour and marking them up, which is what most neocloud imitators do. They have built their own physical capacity for inference, optimized the full technology stack from the software layer all the way down to the rack hardware and recently acquired a company called Agen specifically to push inference latency even lower and throughput even higher. The CEO frames the core problem directly that in 2026, every product you build is powered by tokens, AI intelligence and while you can get those tokens from OpenAI or Anthropic via a simple API call, the moment you want to run open source models, specialized vertical models, or anything other than the two dominant frontier labs, you run into a wall. You can download the weights from Hugging Face and assemble the pieces. But getting those workloads to run at scale, at the economics you need, with the reliability your product requires, is an extraordinarily complex engineering challenge that most companies cannot staff or afford to solve in-house. That is the problem Nebius is solving, and that is why their inference product called Token Factory exists. The financial results are among the most dramatic growth numbers reported by any public company this year. In Q1 2026, Nebius posted $399 million in revenue, a 684% increase from the same quarter a year earlier. In the span of twelve months, the company swung from a $104 million net loss to $621 million in net income. Cash from operations went from negative $184 million to positive $2.26 billion in the same period meaning this is not growth funded by burning investor capital, it is growth that is now generating its own fuel. For the full year 2026, Nebius is guiding for an annualized revenue run rate of $7 billion to $9 billion, with pipeline creation tracking to surpass $4 billion. The contracted backlog sits at $49 billion, anchored by a $27 billion agreement with Meta, a deal worth up to $19.4 billion with Microsoft, and a public endorsement from Jensen Huang at NVIDIA's GTC conference in 2026. The current market cap is approximately $56 billion. A company with $7 to $9 billion in annualized revenue, growing at 684%, turning cash-flow positive, sitting on $49 billion in contracted backlog, operating in a market compounding at 58% annually toward $400 billion, that company has a credible path to 20x from its current valuation if execution holds. That is the trillion dollar case, and it does not require any heroic assumptions and it requires Nebius to keep doing what it is already demonstrably doing. Milk Road Pro called this one early. Our analysts added Nebius to the portfolio when it was still flying under the radar, and we are sitting on a massive gain on that position right now. If you want to see what else we are building conviction on before the rest of the market catches up, come join us at Milk Road Pro using the link below!
1:04

Nebius will be a trillion dollar company (Save this). The neocloud market, purpose-built AI cloud infrastructure, separate from legacy hyperscalers generated roughly $25 billion in revenue in 2025, up 223% year over year. Synergy Research projects it will approach $400 billion by 2031, compounding at 58% annually one of the fastest sustained growth rates ever recorded for an infrastructure category of this scale. The CEO's explanation for why they win is worth understanding in detail. GPU compute is scarce and that part everyone knows but Nebius is not simply renting GPUs by the hour and marking them up, which is what most neocloud imitators do. They have built their own physical capacity for inference, optimized the full technology stack from the software layer all the way down to the rack hardware and recently acquired a company called Agen specifically to push inference latency even lower and throughput even higher. The CEO frames the core problem directly that in 2026, every product you build is powered by tokens, AI intelligence and while you can get those tokens from OpenAI or Anthropic via a simple API call, the moment you want to run open source models, specialized vertical models, or anything other than the two dominant frontier labs, you run into a wall. You can download the weights from Hugging Face and assemble the pieces. But getting those workloads to run at scale, at the economics you need, with the reliability your product requires, is an extraordinarily complex engineering challenge that most companies cannot staff or afford to solve in-house. That is the problem Nebius is solving, and that is why their inference product called Token Factory exists. The financial results are among the most dramatic growth numbers reported by any public company this year. In Q1 2026, Nebius posted $399 million in revenue, a 684% increase from the same quarter a year earlier. In the span of twelve months, the company swung from a $104 million net loss to $621 million in net income. Cash from operations went from negative $184 million to positive $2.26 billion in the same period meaning this is not growth funded by burning investor capital, it is growth that is now generating its own fuel. For the full year 2026, Nebius is guiding for an annualized revenue run rate of $7 billion to $9 billion, with pipeline creation tracking to surpass $4 billion. The contracted backlog sits at $49 billion, anchored by a $27 billion agreement with Meta, a deal worth up to $19.4 billion with Microsoft, and a public endorsement from Jensen Huang at NVIDIA's GTC conference in 2026. The current market cap is approximately $56 billion. A company with $7 to $9 billion in annualized revenue, growing at 684%, turning cash-flow positive, sitting on $49 billion in contracted backlog, operating in a market compounding at 58% annually toward $400 billion, that company has a credible path to 20x from its current valuation if execution holds. That is the trillion dollar case, and it does not require any heroic assumptions and it requires Nebius to keep doing what it is already demonstrably doing. Milk Road Pro called this one early. Our analysts added Nebius to the portfolio when it was still flying under the radar, and we are sitting on a massive gain on that position right now. If you want to see what else we are building conviction on before the rest of the market catches up, come join us at Milk Road Pro using the link below!

Milk Road AI

28,622 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

$AMD Valuation at $70-$100B Revenue in 2026🧵 As of December 4, 2025, AMD's stock trades at approximately $220, with a market cap of $355billion. Revised Valuation with $70B Revenue Earnings Per Share (EPS): Assuming a 40% operating margin (consistent with historical trends, probably higher), $70 billion in revenue translates to $28 billion in operating income. After taxes and interest, net income could be $20 billion, or $12.50 EPS Forward P/E: At 50x-60x (a premium due to growth), the stock price could reach $650-$750 EV/EBITDA: With $28 billion EBITDA, at 40x, EV is $1.12 trillion. Subtracting $5 billion net debt, equity value is $1.115 trillion, or $697 per share. Revised Valuation with $100B Revenue EPS: $100 billion revenue at 45% margin yields $45 billion operating income, $35 billion net income, or $22 EPS. Forward P/E: At 50x-70x, the stock price could reach $1,100-$1,540 EV/EBITDA: $40 billion EBITDA at 45x EV/EBITDA yields $1.8 trillion EV. Subtracting $5 billion net debt, equity value is $1.795 trillion, or $1,122 per share. The market's willingness to assign a high P/E multiple to AMD will be based on the anticipation that these partnerships will translate into substantial revenue and earnings growth. The P/E ratio for the semiconductor industry is approximately 58.57, a significant increase from previous years because of AI CapEx Growth and we are only 2nd year of 10 years cycle. Hence, if $AMD grew to $70B-$100B revenue in 2026, 50x-70x P/E is justified. AMD's existing partnerships with OpenAI , $Meta, $MSFT, $AMZN, $GOOGL, $DELL, $HPE, $SMCI,xAI , Oracle, Vulture combined with new collaborations with international 40+ countries like Saudi,UAE form a solid foundation for revenue growth. The OpenAI deal alone could contribute $25 billion to $28 billion(2026), while Meta's expanded allocation and Oracle's increased orders with the rest add substantial upside of 1m+ GPUs(FY2026) . Technological Leadership: The MI450 GPU, with its superior inference and training capabilities, positions AMD to disrupt Nvidia's market dominance. Benchmarks show 1.5-2x performance advantages at 35-50% lower TCO, making it an attractive choice for hyperscalers. The ROCm platform's maturity, supporting day-zero integration for major AI models, closes the software gap with CUDA, enhancing AMD's competitiveness. In conclusion, AMD's combination of strategic partnerships, technological leadership, and favorable market dynamics positions it to achieve $70 billion to $100 billion in revenue by 2026. This growth is not merely aspirational but grounded in real demand signals and execution capabilities. While risks remain, the upside potential is significant, making AMD a the best AI Name in this AI Supercycle trading at extreme cheap valuation. Not Financial Advice!
1:37

$AMD Valuation at $70-$100B Revenue in 2026🧵 As of December 4, 2025, AMD's stock trades at approximately $220, with a market cap of $355billion. Revised Valuation with $70B Revenue Earnings Per Share (EPS): Assuming a 40% operating margin (consistent with historical trends, probably higher), $70 billion in revenue translates to $28 billion in operating income. After taxes and interest, net income could be $20 billion, or $12.50 EPS Forward P/E: At 50x-60x (a premium due to growth), the stock price could reach $650-$750 EV/EBITDA: With $28 billion EBITDA, at 40x, EV is $1.12 trillion. Subtracting $5 billion net debt, equity value is $1.115 trillion, or $697 per share. Revised Valuation with $100B Revenue EPS: $100 billion revenue at 45% margin yields $45 billion operating income, $35 billion net income, or $22 EPS. Forward P/E: At 50x-70x, the stock price could reach $1,100-$1,540 EV/EBITDA: $40 billion EBITDA at 45x EV/EBITDA yields $1.8 trillion EV. Subtracting $5 billion net debt, equity value is $1.795 trillion, or $1,122 per share. The market's willingness to assign a high P/E multiple to AMD will be based on the anticipation that these partnerships will translate into substantial revenue and earnings growth. The P/E ratio for the semiconductor industry is approximately 58.57, a significant increase from previous years because of AI CapEx Growth and we are only 2nd year of 10 years cycle. Hence, if $AMD grew to $70B-$100B revenue in 2026, 50x-70x P/E is justified. AMD's existing partnerships with OpenAI , $Meta, $MSFT, $AMZN, $GOOGL, $DELL, $HPE, $SMCI,xAI , Oracle, Vulture combined with new collaborations with international 40+ countries like Saudi,UAE form a solid foundation for revenue growth. The OpenAI deal alone could contribute $25 billion to $28 billion(2026), while Meta's expanded allocation and Oracle's increased orders with the rest add substantial upside of 1m+ GPUs(FY2026) . Technological Leadership: The MI450 GPU, with its superior inference and training capabilities, positions AMD to disrupt Nvidia's market dominance. Benchmarks show 1.5-2x performance advantages at 35-50% lower TCO, making it an attractive choice for hyperscalers. The ROCm platform's maturity, supporting day-zero integration for major AI models, closes the software gap with CUDA, enhancing AMD's competitiveness. In conclusion, AMD's combination of strategic partnerships, technological leadership, and favorable market dynamics positions it to achieve $70 billion to $100 billion in revenue by 2026. This growth is not merely aspirational but grounded in real demand signals and execution capabilities. While risks remain, the upside potential is significant, making AMD a the best AI Name in this AI Supercycle trading at extreme cheap valuation. Not Financial Advice!

Mike

187,491 просмотров • 8 месяцев назад

Nebius is going to be a Trillion-dollar company! Twelve months ago, Nebius was trading near $18 per share with roughly $55 million in quarterly revenue. Today the stock trades above $225, quarterly revenue just came in at $399 million, up 684% year over year and the company has a contracted revenue backlog that would make most Fortune 500 companies envious. But the current market cap, sitting around $56 billion, prices in almost none of what is actually coming. The first reason Nebius reaches a trillion is the Meta deal alone. In March, Nebius signed a five year agreement with Meta worth up to $27 billion, one of the largest infrastructure contracts Meta has ever signed with any company under which Nebius will provide $12 billion in dedicated AI capacity across multiple locations, with Meta also having committed to purchase up to an additional $15 billion in third-party capacity over the same period. That contract barely starts until 2027, which means the revenue impact is not yet reflected in any trailing metric. The second reason is Microsoft, which is currently receiving its first deployment phases from Nebius and is expected to contribute at full annual run rate starting in 2027. Between Meta and Microsoft alone, Nebius has signed agreements worth more than $46 billion in total contracted value before a single additional customer is counted. The third reason is the ARR trajectory, which is the fastest revenue ramp of any infrastructure company in the public markets. Nebius ended 2025 at $1.25 billion in ARR and is guiding to $7–9 billion ARR by year-end 2026. Wall Street analysts project revenue growing 523% in 2026 and another 206% in 2027. One of the company's own institutional shareholders has already suggested the year-end ARR could come in more than twice the guided range if the Meta and Microsoft ramps hit their timelines. The fourth reason is Nvidia's direct involvement. Nvidia made a $2 billion strategic equity investment in Nebius and has given Nebius early access to the Vera Rubin platform, its next generation GPU architecture as part of the delivery commitments to Meta. The fifth reason is the capacity buildout, which is being funded by the revenue itself. Nebius invested $2.5 billion in capex in Q1 alone, CEO Arkady Volozh has guided for $16–20 billion in total investment for 2026, and contracted capacity is now on track to exceed 4 GW by year end with new owned sites in Pennsylvania at 1.2 GW and Finland at 310 MW now under development. The more capacity they build, the more they can sell and demand continues to outpace supply at every stage of the buildout. When you run the math on a business with $7–9 billion in ARR exiting 2026, a $27 billion Meta contract that begins in earnest in 2027, a Microsoft relationship at full run rate, 206% analyst projected growth in 2027, and a structural relationship with Nvidia that gives it hardware access no competitor can match, a trillion-dollar valuation within three to four years is not a moonshot. It is the base case if the compounding holds, and every data point so far suggests it is. Milk Road Pro called this one early. Our analysts added Nebius to the portfolio when it was still flying under the radar, and we are sitting on a massive gain on that position right now. If you want to see what else we are building conviction on before the rest of the market catches up, come join us at Milk Road Pro at the link in bio/below!
1:04

Nebius is going to be a Trillion-dollar company! Twelve months ago, Nebius was trading near $18 per share with roughly $55 million in quarterly revenue. Today the stock trades above $225, quarterly revenue just came in at $399 million, up 684% year over year and the company has a contracted revenue backlog that would make most Fortune 500 companies envious. But the current market cap, sitting around $56 billion, prices in almost none of what is actually coming. The first reason Nebius reaches a trillion is the Meta deal alone. In March, Nebius signed a five year agreement with Meta worth up to $27 billion, one of the largest infrastructure contracts Meta has ever signed with any company under which Nebius will provide $12 billion in dedicated AI capacity across multiple locations, with Meta also having committed to purchase up to an additional $15 billion in third-party capacity over the same period. That contract barely starts until 2027, which means the revenue impact is not yet reflected in any trailing metric. The second reason is Microsoft, which is currently receiving its first deployment phases from Nebius and is expected to contribute at full annual run rate starting in 2027. Between Meta and Microsoft alone, Nebius has signed agreements worth more than $46 billion in total contracted value before a single additional customer is counted. The third reason is the ARR trajectory, which is the fastest revenue ramp of any infrastructure company in the public markets. Nebius ended 2025 at $1.25 billion in ARR and is guiding to $7–9 billion ARR by year-end 2026. Wall Street analysts project revenue growing 523% in 2026 and another 206% in 2027. One of the company's own institutional shareholders has already suggested the year-end ARR could come in more than twice the guided range if the Meta and Microsoft ramps hit their timelines. The fourth reason is Nvidia's direct involvement. Nvidia made a $2 billion strategic equity investment in Nebius and has given Nebius early access to the Vera Rubin platform, its next generation GPU architecture as part of the delivery commitments to Meta. The fifth reason is the capacity buildout, which is being funded by the revenue itself. Nebius invested $2.5 billion in capex in Q1 alone, CEO Arkady Volozh has guided for $16–20 billion in total investment for 2026, and contracted capacity is now on track to exceed 4 GW by year end with new owned sites in Pennsylvania at 1.2 GW and Finland at 310 MW now under development. The more capacity they build, the more they can sell and demand continues to outpace supply at every stage of the buildout. When you run the math on a business with $7–9 billion in ARR exiting 2026, a $27 billion Meta contract that begins in earnest in 2027, a Microsoft relationship at full run rate, 206% analyst projected growth in 2027, and a structural relationship with Nvidia that gives it hardware access no competitor can match, a trillion-dollar valuation within three to four years is not a moonshot. It is the base case if the compounding holds, and every data point so far suggests it is. Milk Road Pro called this one early. Our analysts added Nebius to the portfolio when it was still flying under the radar, and we are sitting on a massive gain on that position right now. If you want to see what else we are building conviction on before the rest of the market catches up, come join us at Milk Road Pro at the link in bio/below!

Milk Road AI

48,673 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

I think Starlink is wildly undervalued. It’s a $1+ trillion company in the making on its own. A lot of people still think Starlink is just “internet from space,” but in reality, it’s one of the most important communications networks ever built. In 2025 alone, Starlink generated $11.4 billion in revenue, accounting for roughly 61% of SpaceX’s total revenue. It served more than 10 million customers globally and generated $4.4 billion in operating profit w/ EBITDA margins of 63%. Starlink is a cash machine. Fyi, independent analysts forecast Starlink will generate approximately $20 billion in revenue, $14 billion in EBITDA, and over $8 billion in free cash flow in 2026… plus consumer broadband will continue to expand rapidly, while aviation, maritime, Starshield, and direct-to-cell services will open entirely new markets. The real advantage is that Starlink owns the entire stack. SpaceX builds the satellites, they launch the satellites, they operate the network, and they manufacture the user terminals. No competitor comes close to that level of vertical integration…. On top of this, starship will make the story even more crazier with next-generation satellites, 100+ satellites per launch, dramatically lowering launch costs, and thousands of new satellites being deployed each year, the cost of serving additional customers continuing to fall, while the network & tech keep getting stronger. If you really want to understand why SpaceX is at a $2T valuation… start with Starlink. Starlink already generates the majority of SpaceX’s revenue, profit, and free cash flow. It helps fund Starship development, supports expansion across the company, and provides the financial engine behind SpaceX’s long-term ambitions. The bull case is based on real revenue, real profits, real customers, and a moat that gets wider every year… NOT hype. The way I see it, Starlink will become the most valuable communication company in human history and a $1 trillion valuation doesn’t sound crazy to me for this business/technology alone.
0:23

I think Starlink is wildly undervalued. It’s a $1+ trillion company in the making on its own. A lot of people still think Starlink is just “internet from space,” but in reality, it’s one of the most important communications networks ever built. In 2025 alone, Starlink generated $11.4 billion in revenue, accounting for roughly 61% of SpaceX’s total revenue. It served more than 10 million customers globally and generated $4.4 billion in operating profit w/ EBITDA margins of 63%. Starlink is a cash machine. Fyi, independent analysts forecast Starlink will generate approximately $20 billion in revenue, $14 billion in EBITDA, and over $8 billion in free cash flow in 2026… plus consumer broadband will continue to expand rapidly, while aviation, maritime, Starshield, and direct-to-cell services will open entirely new markets. The real advantage is that Starlink owns the entire stack. SpaceX builds the satellites, they launch the satellites, they operate the network, and they manufacture the user terminals. No competitor comes close to that level of vertical integration…. On top of this, starship will make the story even more crazier with next-generation satellites, 100+ satellites per launch, dramatically lowering launch costs, and thousands of new satellites being deployed each year, the cost of serving additional customers continuing to fall, while the network & tech keep getting stronger. If you really want to understand why SpaceX is at a $2T valuation… start with Starlink. Starlink already generates the majority of SpaceX’s revenue, profit, and free cash flow. It helps fund Starship development, supports expansion across the company, and provides the financial engine behind SpaceX’s long-term ambitions. The bull case is based on real revenue, real profits, real customers, and a moat that gets wider every year… NOT hype. The way I see it, Starlink will become the most valuable communication company in human history and a $1 trillion valuation doesn’t sound crazy to me for this business/technology alone.

Teslaconomics

28,227 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

THIS IS ABSOLUTELY RIDICULOUS. OpenAI and Anthropic are losing money on every dollar they make. OpenAI generated $20 billion in revenue in 2025 and is projected to lose $14 billion in the same year. Internal forecasts project cumulative losses hitting $44 billion by 2028. The company's own CFO warned executives in April 2026 that OpenAI might struggle to finance upcoming computing deals if revenue growth slows. Anthropic reached $4.3 billion in annualized revenue in April 2026 against $19 billion in total costs. It spends $3 to make $1, and is not expected to stop burning cash until 2027. Now look at what these two companies have committed to spend. OpenAI and Anthropic together have committed $1.05 trillion in cloud spending to Microsoft, Oracle, Google and Amazon, making up 43 to 54% of each provider's entire future revenue backlog. - Microsoft: $627B total backlog. OpenAI and Anthropic account for 49%. - Oracle: $553B total backlog. OpenAI alone accounts for 54%. - Google: $467.6B total backlog. Anthropic accounts for 43%. - Amazon: $464B total backlog. OpenAI and Anthropic account for 51%. The entire cloud industry's future revenue is a bet on two companies losing billions every quarter. Microsoft, Alphabet, Meta and Amazon are collectively expected to spend $725 billion in capex in 2026, almost entirely on AI infrastructure. Combined hyperscaler capex from 2025 to 2027 is projected at $1.15 trillion, more than double what was spent from 2022 to 2024. What is the return on all of this? McKinsey's 2025 State of AI survey found that only a minority of companies reported AI meaningfully increased revenue or reduced costs. Enterprise generative AI spending grew from $1.7 billion in 2023 to $37 billion in 2025 and most CIOs still describe their initiatives as pilots without clear ROI metrics. Microsoft's AI business is running at a $37 billion annual revenue run rate with 123% year over year growth. That sounds impressive until you realize most of the capex funding is justified by expected future AI revenue rather than current AI profit. The internet burned money for years before it became the most profitable industry in history. But right now $1 trillion in committed cloud spend, $725 billion in annual capex, two loss-making customers making up half of every major cloud provider's revenue backlog, and the enterprises writing the checks cannot tell you if any of it is working.
0:22

THIS IS ABSOLUTELY RIDICULOUS. OpenAI and Anthropic are losing money on every dollar they make. OpenAI generated $20 billion in revenue in 2025 and is projected to lose $14 billion in the same year. Internal forecasts project cumulative losses hitting $44 billion by 2028. The company's own CFO warned executives in April 2026 that OpenAI might struggle to finance upcoming computing deals if revenue growth slows. Anthropic reached $4.3 billion in annualized revenue in April 2026 against $19 billion in total costs. It spends $3 to make $1, and is not expected to stop burning cash until 2027. Now look at what these two companies have committed to spend. OpenAI and Anthropic together have committed $1.05 trillion in cloud spending to Microsoft, Oracle, Google and Amazon, making up 43 to 54% of each provider's entire future revenue backlog. - Microsoft: $627B total backlog. OpenAI and Anthropic account for 49%. - Oracle: $553B total backlog. OpenAI alone accounts for 54%. - Google: $467.6B total backlog. Anthropic accounts for 43%. - Amazon: $464B total backlog. OpenAI and Anthropic account for 51%. The entire cloud industry's future revenue is a bet on two companies losing billions every quarter. Microsoft, Alphabet, Meta and Amazon are collectively expected to spend $725 billion in capex in 2026, almost entirely on AI infrastructure. Combined hyperscaler capex from 2025 to 2027 is projected at $1.15 trillion, more than double what was spent from 2022 to 2024. What is the return on all of this? McKinsey's 2025 State of AI survey found that only a minority of companies reported AI meaningfully increased revenue or reduced costs. Enterprise generative AI spending grew from $1.7 billion in 2023 to $37 billion in 2025 and most CIOs still describe their initiatives as pilots without clear ROI metrics. Microsoft's AI business is running at a $37 billion annual revenue run rate with 123% year over year growth. That sounds impressive until you realize most of the capex funding is justified by expected future AI revenue rather than current AI profit. The internet burned money for years before it became the most profitable industry in history. But right now $1 trillion in committed cloud spend, $725 billion in annual capex, two loss-making customers making up half of every major cloud provider's revenue backlog, and the enterprises writing the checks cannot tell you if any of it is working.

Crypto Rover

58,862 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

When does the AI spending actually end? It's the question Wall Street doesn't want to answer. The Big Four hyperscalers are pouring $600+ billion into AI infrastructure this year alone. That's triple what they spent two years ago. Amazon just guided $200 billion in 2026 capex. The company is expected to go negative on free cash flow this year - somewhere between $17 billion and $28 billion in the red, depending on which bank you ask. Alphabet's free cash flow is projected to fall 90%. From $73 billion to $8 billion. These are the most profitable companies in history. And they're borrowing money to fund a buildout with no clear end date. The depreciation problem is what nobody wants to discuss: Nvidia chips run on a 2-3 year product cycle. Each new generation delivers 2-3x better performance. So the H100s shipping today will be economically obsolete by 2027. BUT the hyperscalers are depreciating these assets over 5-6 years. Meta extended its useful life estimates to five-and-a-half years. That single change cut $2.9 billion from their 2025 depreciation expense. Microsoft, Alphabet, Oracle - all made similar moves. Run the numbers and depreciation is understated by roughly $176 billion between 2026 and 2028. That means Oracle's earnings could be inflated by 27% and Meta's by 21%. This isn't fraud. GAAP allows it. But it's aggressive accounting that makes current earnings look far better than the underlying economics. The debt picture makes it even WORSE. The top five hyperscalers raised $108 billion in debt last year - more than 3x the prior nine-year average. JP Morgan projects $1.5 trillion in tech debt issuance ahead. They're even securitizing data center debt into asset-backed securities. $13.3 billion this year alone. Those structures have a history. This looks eerily similar to the data connectivity buildout circa 2000. In that cycle, telecoms built massive infrastructure on borrowed money chasing demand that never materialized. By 2002, less than 5% of capacity was in use. The pattern is familiar: Capex explodes. Returns don't materialize. Accounting flatters earnings. Debt bridges the gap. Then the music stops. I'm not making predictions about timing. But when free cash flow turns negative, when hyperscalers hold more debt than cash for the first time, when accounting changes are inflating earnings by double digits... The math changes. We've seen this play out before multiple times. AND IT DOESN'T END WELL
1:12

When does the AI spending actually end? It's the question Wall Street doesn't want to answer. The Big Four hyperscalers are pouring $600+ billion into AI infrastructure this year alone. That's triple what they spent two years ago. Amazon just guided $200 billion in 2026 capex. The company is expected to go negative on free cash flow this year - somewhere between $17 billion and $28 billion in the red, depending on which bank you ask. Alphabet's free cash flow is projected to fall 90%. From $73 billion to $8 billion. These are the most profitable companies in history. And they're borrowing money to fund a buildout with no clear end date. The depreciation problem is what nobody wants to discuss: Nvidia chips run on a 2-3 year product cycle. Each new generation delivers 2-3x better performance. So the H100s shipping today will be economically obsolete by 2027. BUT the hyperscalers are depreciating these assets over 5-6 years. Meta extended its useful life estimates to five-and-a-half years. That single change cut $2.9 billion from their 2025 depreciation expense. Microsoft, Alphabet, Oracle - all made similar moves. Run the numbers and depreciation is understated by roughly $176 billion between 2026 and 2028. That means Oracle's earnings could be inflated by 27% and Meta's by 21%. This isn't fraud. GAAP allows it. But it's aggressive accounting that makes current earnings look far better than the underlying economics. The debt picture makes it even WORSE. The top five hyperscalers raised $108 billion in debt last year - more than 3x the prior nine-year average. JP Morgan projects $1.5 trillion in tech debt issuance ahead. They're even securitizing data center debt into asset-backed securities. $13.3 billion this year alone. Those structures have a history. This looks eerily similar to the data connectivity buildout circa 2000. In that cycle, telecoms built massive infrastructure on borrowed money chasing demand that never materialized. By 2002, less than 5% of capacity was in use. The pattern is familiar: Capex explodes. Returns don't materialize. Accounting flatters earnings. Debt bridges the gap. Then the music stops. I'm not making predictions about timing. But when free cash flow turns negative, when hyperscalers hold more debt than cash for the first time, when accounting changes are inflating earnings by double digits... The math changes. We've seen this play out before multiple times. AND IT DOESN'T END WELL

George Noble

37,099 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

Google just reported $99 billion in profits it never actually received. Alphabet posted net income of $112.1 billion for a single quarter. Earnings per share came in at $9.11 against a Wall Street estimate of $2.87. That is one of the largest profit quarters any company has ever printed. Yet the stock fell about 7% the same day. When people read past the headline and opened the earnings release, they found the reason sitting in one footnote... $99 billion of that profit came from a line called other income. Alphabet describes it as "primarily the result of net unrealized gains on our equity securities." So Google did not sell anything. It marked up shares it already owned and ran the increase through its income statement. That single line added $77.1 billion to net income after tax. It accounted for $6.26 of the $9.11 in earnings per share. Strip it out and adjusted earnings per share were $2.85. Analysts wanted $2.89. The ACTUAL business missed. Now here is what makes this insane: Most of that $99 billion came from two holdings, SpaceX and Anthropic. SpaceX went public on June 12 at roughly $1.77 trillion, up from about $400 billion a year earlier. Alphabet's stake is worth $94.1 billion, and roughly $80 billion of it sits under sale restrictions. Anthropic went from a $350 billion valuation to $965 billion inside the same quarter. Alphabet's private company holdings were worth about $124.3 billion on June 30, and the vast majority of that is Anthropic. Google cannot sell either position right now. Now trace where that valuation came from: Google started putting money into Anthropic in 2023. A $300 million bet has grown into a $13.3 billion position with commitments of up to $30 billion more. Anthropic committed to buying at least five gigawatts of computing capacity from Google Cloud. Google Cloud revenue then grew 82% to about $24.8 billion, the strongest quarter that business has ever had. That growth is part of the story the market uses to price both companies. And when Anthropic's valuation jumped, Google booked the jump as its OWN profit. Google is the investor, the supplier, and the party deciding what the asset is worth. A tax and accounting consultant named Robert Willens flagged this back in April, pointing out that Alphabet is able to influence the value of one of its own assets. And Alphabet's free cash flow for the quarter was negative $5.9 billion. That is the first negative quarter since Google went public in August 2004. Capital spending hit $44.9 billion. Operating cash flow was $39.1 billion. Capex now eats about 37.5% of every dollar of revenue, the highest share in the company's public life. To fund it, Alphabet has taken on roughly $100 billion of debt this year and raised about $85 billion in a June share sale, its first in more than two decades. This is a company that spent years buying its own stock back. What happens next: Alphabet raised 2026 capital spending guidance to between $195 billion and $205 billion, the second raise in three months. The finance chief told analysts 2027 spending will rise significantly. The company also disclosed $811 billion in contracted future spending commitments as of June, up nearly $500 billion from March. Those commitments are signed contracts that get paid in cash. The profit is an estimate of what a private company might be worth on a given day. Estimates move in both directions. If Anthropic or SpaceX gets repriced downward, the same line that produced the biggest quarter in Google's history runs backwards, and this quarter produced no free cash flow to absorb it. Meta, Microsoft and Amazon are all carrying their own private AI stakes into their own earnings reports. Watch how much of their profit they actually collected in cash...
0:48

Google just reported $99 billion in profits it never actually received. Alphabet posted net income of $112.1 billion for a single quarter. Earnings per share came in at $9.11 against a Wall Street estimate of $2.87. That is one of the largest profit quarters any company has ever printed. Yet the stock fell about 7% the same day. When people read past the headline and opened the earnings release, they found the reason sitting in one footnote... $99 billion of that profit came from a line called other income. Alphabet describes it as "primarily the result of net unrealized gains on our equity securities." So Google did not sell anything. It marked up shares it already owned and ran the increase through its income statement. That single line added $77.1 billion to net income after tax. It accounted for $6.26 of the $9.11 in earnings per share. Strip it out and adjusted earnings per share were $2.85. Analysts wanted $2.89. The ACTUAL business missed. Now here is what makes this insane: Most of that $99 billion came from two holdings, SpaceX and Anthropic. SpaceX went public on June 12 at roughly $1.77 trillion, up from about $400 billion a year earlier. Alphabet's stake is worth $94.1 billion, and roughly $80 billion of it sits under sale restrictions. Anthropic went from a $350 billion valuation to $965 billion inside the same quarter. Alphabet's private company holdings were worth about $124.3 billion on June 30, and the vast majority of that is Anthropic. Google cannot sell either position right now. Now trace where that valuation came from: Google started putting money into Anthropic in 2023. A $300 million bet has grown into a $13.3 billion position with commitments of up to $30 billion more. Anthropic committed to buying at least five gigawatts of computing capacity from Google Cloud. Google Cloud revenue then grew 82% to about $24.8 billion, the strongest quarter that business has ever had. That growth is part of the story the market uses to price both companies. And when Anthropic's valuation jumped, Google booked the jump as its OWN profit. Google is the investor, the supplier, and the party deciding what the asset is worth. A tax and accounting consultant named Robert Willens flagged this back in April, pointing out that Alphabet is able to influence the value of one of its own assets. And Alphabet's free cash flow for the quarter was negative $5.9 billion. That is the first negative quarter since Google went public in August 2004. Capital spending hit $44.9 billion. Operating cash flow was $39.1 billion. Capex now eats about 37.5% of every dollar of revenue, the highest share in the company's public life. To fund it, Alphabet has taken on roughly $100 billion of debt this year and raised about $85 billion in a June share sale, its first in more than two decades. This is a company that spent years buying its own stock back. What happens next: Alphabet raised 2026 capital spending guidance to between $195 billion and $205 billion, the second raise in three months. The finance chief told analysts 2027 spending will rise significantly. The company also disclosed $811 billion in contracted future spending commitments as of June, up nearly $500 billion from March. Those commitments are signed contracts that get paid in cash. The profit is an estimate of what a private company might be worth on a given day. Estimates move in both directions. If Anthropic or SpaceX gets repriced downward, the same line that produced the biggest quarter in Google's history runs backwards, and this quarter produced no free cash flow to absorb it. Meta, Microsoft and Amazon are all carrying their own private AI stakes into their own earnings reports. Watch how much of their profit they actually collected in cash...

Ricardo

363,984 просмотров • 19 дней назад

In 2018, Tesla $TSLA was worth just under $60 billion. They signed a 10-year CEO extension & compensation deal with Elon Musk , which offered him *zero base compensation*, but up to $55 billion in compensation if, and only if, he could more than *10x the company's value* to $650 billion, a feat no CEO has ever accomplished. By 2020, less than 3 years later, Tesla did indeed hit a $650 billion market cap, despite the skeptics who literally called it "laughably impossible" when the plan was publicized. Now, the Delaware courts are shooting down that compensation package, citing that the Board of Directors were not truly independent and that shareholders weren't aware of the Board's relationship with Musk. This is a joke, an insult to basic capitalist principles, and a mockery of the work that Elon put in to grow Tesla to this point. Below is a clip from 2018 highlighting how wildly ambitious these milestones were considered by the media at that time:
1:51

In 2018, Tesla $TSLA was worth just under $60 billion. They signed a 10-year CEO extension & compensation deal with Elon Musk , which offered him *zero base compensation*, but up to $55 billion in compensation if, and only if, he could more than *10x the company's value* to $650 billion, a feat no CEO has ever accomplished. By 2020, less than 3 years later, Tesla did indeed hit a $650 billion market cap, despite the skeptics who literally called it "laughably impossible" when the plan was publicized. Now, the Delaware courts are shooting down that compensation package, citing that the Board of Directors were not truly independent and that shareholders weren't aware of the Board's relationship with Musk. This is a joke, an insult to basic capitalist principles, and a mockery of the work that Elon put in to grow Tesla to this point. Below is a clip from 2018 highlighting how wildly ambitious these milestones were considered by the media at that time:

Stock Talk

39,791,284 просмотров • 2 лет назад

Elon Musk just told lenders he's paying back $17.5 BILLION in debt across X and xAI. Including $3 billion in high-yield bonds being redeemed early at 117 cents on the dollar. NOBODY knows where the money is coming from. And nobody seems to care. Let me explain why you should: Morgan Stanley has been calling existing lenders and telling them everything gets repaid in full. The X debt from the Twitter buyout. The xAI bonds from June. All of it. The bonds were structured to stay outstanding for at least 2 years. They're being called back less than a year later at a 17% premium. Bondholders are thrilled. Of course they are. They're getting paid above par on junk paper. But here's the part that should make you uncomfortable: xAI lost $1.46 billion in a single quarter last year. Burned through $7.8 billion in cash in the first 9 months of 2025. Revenue for the September quarter was $107 million. That's a company hemorrhaging roughly $1 billion a month. On a standalone basis, xAI exited 2025 at about a $500 million annualized revenue run rate. Even with optimistic projections, they might hit $2 billion in 2026. So where does $17.5 billion come from? xAI raised $20 billion in a Series E round in January. That's the most likely answer. Take the money investors gave you to build AI infrastructure and use a huge chunk of it to retire debt. But that's NOT a sign of strength. That's financial engineering. You raise $20 billion from investors who think they're funding the next frontier of artificial intelligence, then you turn around and use most of it to clean up the balance sheet before an IPO. Because that's what this is really about. SpaceX is targeting a confidential SEC filing as early as this month. IPO could come in June. Valuation targets exceed $1.75 trillion. The combined SpaceX-xAI entity currently carries about $18 billion in obligations. You can't take a $1.25 trillion company public with $18 billion in legacy debt from a money-losing AI startup and a social media platform that was acquired with leveraged buyout financing. So you nuke the debt. Clean the balance sheet. Present a simpler story to IPO investors. Smart? Absolutely. But let's be honest about what it actually is. SpaceX proper generated about $15 billion in revenue and $8 billion in profit in 2025. xAI generated roughly $250 million in six months and lost $2.5 billion doing it. At a $1.5 trillion IPO valuation, you're looking at roughly 94x trailing sales and 500x trailing earnings for the combined business. Those are not rational multiples. Those are lottery ticket multiples with better branding. And the $17.5 billion debt payoff doesn't change the underlying economics. It only changes the optics. xAI is still burning close to $1 billion a month. Grok still has a fraction of ChatGPT's market share. The revenue doesn't come close to justifying the infrastructure spend. What this reminds me of is the classic pre-IPO playbook taken to an extreme: Use private capital to dress up the financials, time the listing for maximum enthusiasm, and let public market investors hold the bag if execution falls short. The companies that need to clean house before going public are rarely the ones that reward you for buying on day one. My positioning hasn't changed. The AI infrastructure spending boom is real. But the returns aren't materializing for the companies actually deploying the technology. That gap between spending and results is where fortunes get destroyed. Stay skeptical. Stay disciplined. And remember: If the source of $17.5 billion in repayment capital is a mystery, it's a WARNING.
0:48

Elon Musk just told lenders he's paying back $17.5 BILLION in debt across X and xAI. Including $3 billion in high-yield bonds being redeemed early at 117 cents on the dollar. NOBODY knows where the money is coming from. And nobody seems to care. Let me explain why you should: Morgan Stanley has been calling existing lenders and telling them everything gets repaid in full. The X debt from the Twitter buyout. The xAI bonds from June. All of it. The bonds were structured to stay outstanding for at least 2 years. They're being called back less than a year later at a 17% premium. Bondholders are thrilled. Of course they are. They're getting paid above par on junk paper. But here's the part that should make you uncomfortable: xAI lost $1.46 billion in a single quarter last year. Burned through $7.8 billion in cash in the first 9 months of 2025. Revenue for the September quarter was $107 million. That's a company hemorrhaging roughly $1 billion a month. On a standalone basis, xAI exited 2025 at about a $500 million annualized revenue run rate. Even with optimistic projections, they might hit $2 billion in 2026. So where does $17.5 billion come from? xAI raised $20 billion in a Series E round in January. That's the most likely answer. Take the money investors gave you to build AI infrastructure and use a huge chunk of it to retire debt. But that's NOT a sign of strength. That's financial engineering. You raise $20 billion from investors who think they're funding the next frontier of artificial intelligence, then you turn around and use most of it to clean up the balance sheet before an IPO. Because that's what this is really about. SpaceX is targeting a confidential SEC filing as early as this month. IPO could come in June. Valuation targets exceed $1.75 trillion. The combined SpaceX-xAI entity currently carries about $18 billion in obligations. You can't take a $1.25 trillion company public with $18 billion in legacy debt from a money-losing AI startup and a social media platform that was acquired with leveraged buyout financing. So you nuke the debt. Clean the balance sheet. Present a simpler story to IPO investors. Smart? Absolutely. But let's be honest about what it actually is. SpaceX proper generated about $15 billion in revenue and $8 billion in profit in 2025. xAI generated roughly $250 million in six months and lost $2.5 billion doing it. At a $1.5 trillion IPO valuation, you're looking at roughly 94x trailing sales and 500x trailing earnings for the combined business. Those are not rational multiples. Those are lottery ticket multiples with better branding. And the $17.5 billion debt payoff doesn't change the underlying economics. It only changes the optics. xAI is still burning close to $1 billion a month. Grok still has a fraction of ChatGPT's market share. The revenue doesn't come close to justifying the infrastructure spend. What this reminds me of is the classic pre-IPO playbook taken to an extreme: Use private capital to dress up the financials, time the listing for maximum enthusiasm, and let public market investors hold the bag if execution falls short. The companies that need to clean house before going public are rarely the ones that reward you for buying on day one. My positioning hasn't changed. The AI infrastructure spending boom is real. But the returns aren't materializing for the companies actually deploying the technology. That gap between spending and results is where fortunes get destroyed. Stay skeptical. Stay disciplined. And remember: If the source of $17.5 billion in repayment capital is a mystery, it's a WARNING.

George Noble

471,809 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

Microsoft just lost $357 billion in a single day... While Meta gained $170 billion. Both companies are spending over $100 billion on AI this year. One got punished. One got rewarded. The difference tells you everything about where this market is heading: Microsoft reported Wednesday. Beat on revenue. Beat on earnings. Revenue up 17%. EPS up 24%. But the stock dropped 10% - worst decline since March 2020. Why? Azure cloud growth came in at 39%. The Street wanted 39.4%. A miss of 0.4 percentage points erased a third of a trillion dollars. Meanwhile, capex jumped 89% year-over-year to $37.5B in a single quarter. CFO Amy Hood admitted two-thirds went to "short-lived assets" - GPUs that depreciate fast. And Microsoft also said they'll remain "capacity constrained through at least the end of our fiscal year." In other words: "We're spending $72B in six months and STILL can't build data centers fast enough." But that's not the real problem... The real problem is what's happening inside Microsoft's spending. They're not just building infrastructure for Azure customers. They're allocating scarce GPUs to their own products: M365 Copilot, GitHub Copilot, internal R&D. Hood said they must "balance Azure revenue growth with growing needs across first-party apps and AI solutions." Microsoft is competing with its own cloud customers for compute capacity. If they'd allocated all new GPUs to Azure, growth would've exceeded 40%. Instead, they're betting their own AI products will generate more value than selling raw compute. That bet hasn't paid off yet. And 45% of their $625B backlog is tied to ONE customer: OpenAI. Now compare that to Meta: Revenue beat. Earnings beat. Guidance crushed expectations. And they announced $115-135B in AI capex for 2026 - nearly DOUBLE what they spent in 2025. The stock surged 10%. Why the opposite reaction? Meta is seeing immediate returns. Ad impressions up 18%. Average price per ad up 6%. Revenue up 24% year-over-year. Their AI investment is already showing up in the core business TODAY. Better ad targeting. Better recommendations. Better engagement. Q1 revenue guidance came in at $53.5-56.5B - Wall Street expected $51.4B. That's 30% revenue growth ACCELERATION. When you have 3.58B daily active users, AI improvements compound immediately. Zuckerberg called it a "major AI acceleration" and Wall Street didn't care about the $135B spending number. Because they can SEE the connection between spending and revenue. Here's what matters: The hyperscalers are now spending over $600B combined on AI infrastructure in 2026. AI assets depreciate at roughly 20% per year. The five hyperscalers face annual depreciation expenses approaching $400B - MORE than their combined profits in 2025. This is the biggest capital spending cycle in history. And we just entered Phase 3, where AI-enabled revenue models must finally prove their worth. The market stopped rewarding spending. It's rewarding RETURNS. Meta showed returns. Microsoft showed constraints and margin compression. That's why we saw a $527B swing between two companies reporting on the same day. My read: The easy money in the AI trade is over. From here, execution matters more than ambition. Companies that can turn infrastructure spending into measurable productivity gains get rewarded. Companies still building without clear payback get punished - even when they beat estimates. Microsoft isn't a bad company. It's a company that bet big on AI infrastructure and is now scrambling to show ROI before margins collapse further. Meta isn't necessarily a better AI company. It just has a business model where AI improvements translate directly to revenue growth. For investors, the lesson is clear: The AI infrastructure phase is maturing. Winners from here will be companies with clear paths from spending to earnings. Not companies asking you to trust the process while margins compress.
0:32

Microsoft just lost $357 billion in a single day... While Meta gained $170 billion. Both companies are spending over $100 billion on AI this year. One got punished. One got rewarded. The difference tells you everything about where this market is heading: Microsoft reported Wednesday. Beat on revenue. Beat on earnings. Revenue up 17%. EPS up 24%. But the stock dropped 10% - worst decline since March 2020. Why? Azure cloud growth came in at 39%. The Street wanted 39.4%. A miss of 0.4 percentage points erased a third of a trillion dollars. Meanwhile, capex jumped 89% year-over-year to $37.5B in a single quarter. CFO Amy Hood admitted two-thirds went to "short-lived assets" - GPUs that depreciate fast. And Microsoft also said they'll remain "capacity constrained through at least the end of our fiscal year." In other words: "We're spending $72B in six months and STILL can't build data centers fast enough." But that's not the real problem... The real problem is what's happening inside Microsoft's spending. They're not just building infrastructure for Azure customers. They're allocating scarce GPUs to their own products: M365 Copilot, GitHub Copilot, internal R&D. Hood said they must "balance Azure revenue growth with growing needs across first-party apps and AI solutions." Microsoft is competing with its own cloud customers for compute capacity. If they'd allocated all new GPUs to Azure, growth would've exceeded 40%. Instead, they're betting their own AI products will generate more value than selling raw compute. That bet hasn't paid off yet. And 45% of their $625B backlog is tied to ONE customer: OpenAI. Now compare that to Meta: Revenue beat. Earnings beat. Guidance crushed expectations. And they announced $115-135B in AI capex for 2026 - nearly DOUBLE what they spent in 2025. The stock surged 10%. Why the opposite reaction? Meta is seeing immediate returns. Ad impressions up 18%. Average price per ad up 6%. Revenue up 24% year-over-year. Their AI investment is already showing up in the core business TODAY. Better ad targeting. Better recommendations. Better engagement. Q1 revenue guidance came in at $53.5-56.5B - Wall Street expected $51.4B. That's 30% revenue growth ACCELERATION. When you have 3.58B daily active users, AI improvements compound immediately. Zuckerberg called it a "major AI acceleration" and Wall Street didn't care about the $135B spending number. Because they can SEE the connection between spending and revenue. Here's what matters: The hyperscalers are now spending over $600B combined on AI infrastructure in 2026. AI assets depreciate at roughly 20% per year. The five hyperscalers face annual depreciation expenses approaching $400B - MORE than their combined profits in 2025. This is the biggest capital spending cycle in history. And we just entered Phase 3, where AI-enabled revenue models must finally prove their worth. The market stopped rewarding spending. It's rewarding RETURNS. Meta showed returns. Microsoft showed constraints and margin compression. That's why we saw a $527B swing between two companies reporting on the same day. My read: The easy money in the AI trade is over. From here, execution matters more than ambition. Companies that can turn infrastructure spending into measurable productivity gains get rewarded. Companies still building without clear payback get punished - even when they beat estimates. Microsoft isn't a bad company. It's a company that bet big on AI infrastructure and is now scrambling to show ROI before margins collapse further. Meta isn't necessarily a better AI company. It just has a business model where AI improvements translate directly to revenue growth. For investors, the lesson is clear: The AI infrastructure phase is maturing. Winners from here will be companies with clear paths from spending to earnings. Not companies asking you to trust the process while margins compress.

George Noble

120,284 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

Big Tech is spending $700 BILLION on AI this year. But their cash flow is collapsing. Amazon is going into debt. Google's free cash flow is dropping 90%. And they're literally paying influencers $600,000 each to convince you AI is worth using. If this technology was as revolutionary as they claim, why are they spending half a million dollars per creator to sell it? Here's what's actually happening behind the scenes: This week, all four tech giants reported earnings at once and every single one dropped a spending number that made Wall Street lose its mind. Amazon: $200 billion in capex. The largest corporate capital expenditure in HISTORY. Stock dropped 9%. Google: $185 billion. Wall Street expected $120 billion. Stock dropped 5%. Meta: $135 billion. Double what they spent last year. Microsoft: down 17% this year, worst performer in the group. Combined 2026 AI infrastructure spend: almost $700 billion. But here's where it gets ugly. Amazon's free cash flow collapsed 71%. Morgan Stanley projects they'll burn through $17 billion in NEGATIVE free cash flow this year. Bank of America says the deficit could hit $28 billion. Amazon quietly filed with the SEC on Friday saying they might need to raise debt to keep building. Google's free cash flow is projected to crater 90%, from $73 billion down to $8.2 billion. They already did a $25 billion bond sale in November and their long-term debt QUADRUPLED last year. These companies are spending everything they have, then borrowing more, then spending that too. Now here's the part that got me thinking: CNBC just reported that Google, Microsoft, OpenAI, Anthropic, and Meta are paying influencers between $400,000 and $600,000 EACH to promote AI products on Instagram and YouTube. AI platforms spent over $1 BILLION on digital ads in 2025, a 126% jump year-over-year. Google and Microsoft's AI ad spending jumped 495% in January 2026 alone. Anthropic is running Super Bowl ads. OpenAI is flying creators to private events and covering all expenses. When was the last time a truly revolutionary technology needed a $1 billion ad campaign and $600K influencer deals to get adoption? Did the iPhone need influencer campaigns? Did Google Search need Super Bowl ads in 1998? Did email need a billion dollar marketing push? No. People just used them because the value was obvious. You know what DOES need massive paid promotions? Pharmaceutical drugs. Crypto exchanges. Online gambling apps. MLM companies. Products where adoption is driven by hype, not utility. And now, apparently, AI. So the pitch from Big Tech is: "This technology will eliminate your job. Also please use it. Here's $600K if you tell your followers it's cool." They need HUMANS to sell a product they designed to REPLACE humans. They need creators to promote a technology that will eventually make creators obsolete. They need influencers to build trust in a system that will eliminate the need for influencer marketing entirely. The question everyone should be asking: If $700 billion per year in spending can't produce a product that sells itself, when exactly does this start making money? Because right now the math is messed up. $700 billion in spending, cash flow crashing, stocks tanking, SEC filings about raising more capital, and the best growth strategy they've got is paying tiktokers to demo features. Either AI is about to deliver the greatest economic transformation in human history, or we're watching the most expensive corporate Hail Mary ever thrown. And the fact that they need to pay half a million dollars per influencer to convince you it's the first one isn't a good sign.
0:49

Big Tech is spending $700 BILLION on AI this year. But their cash flow is collapsing. Amazon is going into debt. Google's free cash flow is dropping 90%. And they're literally paying influencers $600,000 each to convince you AI is worth using. If this technology was as revolutionary as they claim, why are they spending half a million dollars per creator to sell it? Here's what's actually happening behind the scenes: This week, all four tech giants reported earnings at once and every single one dropped a spending number that made Wall Street lose its mind. Amazon: $200 billion in capex. The largest corporate capital expenditure in HISTORY. Stock dropped 9%. Google: $185 billion. Wall Street expected $120 billion. Stock dropped 5%. Meta: $135 billion. Double what they spent last year. Microsoft: down 17% this year, worst performer in the group. Combined 2026 AI infrastructure spend: almost $700 billion. But here's where it gets ugly. Amazon's free cash flow collapsed 71%. Morgan Stanley projects they'll burn through $17 billion in NEGATIVE free cash flow this year. Bank of America says the deficit could hit $28 billion. Amazon quietly filed with the SEC on Friday saying they might need to raise debt to keep building. Google's free cash flow is projected to crater 90%, from $73 billion down to $8.2 billion. They already did a $25 billion bond sale in November and their long-term debt QUADRUPLED last year. These companies are spending everything they have, then borrowing more, then spending that too. Now here's the part that got me thinking: CNBC just reported that Google, Microsoft, OpenAI, Anthropic, and Meta are paying influencers between $400,000 and $600,000 EACH to promote AI products on Instagram and YouTube. AI platforms spent over $1 BILLION on digital ads in 2025, a 126% jump year-over-year. Google and Microsoft's AI ad spending jumped 495% in January 2026 alone. Anthropic is running Super Bowl ads. OpenAI is flying creators to private events and covering all expenses. When was the last time a truly revolutionary technology needed a $1 billion ad campaign and $600K influencer deals to get adoption? Did the iPhone need influencer campaigns? Did Google Search need Super Bowl ads in 1998? Did email need a billion dollar marketing push? No. People just used them because the value was obvious. You know what DOES need massive paid promotions? Pharmaceutical drugs. Crypto exchanges. Online gambling apps. MLM companies. Products where adoption is driven by hype, not utility. And now, apparently, AI. So the pitch from Big Tech is: "This technology will eliminate your job. Also please use it. Here's $600K if you tell your followers it's cool." They need HUMANS to sell a product they designed to REPLACE humans. They need creators to promote a technology that will eventually make creators obsolete. They need influencers to build trust in a system that will eliminate the need for influencer marketing entirely. The question everyone should be asking: If $700 billion per year in spending can't produce a product that sells itself, when exactly does this start making money? Because right now the math is messed up. $700 billion in spending, cash flow crashing, stocks tanking, SEC filings about raising more capital, and the best growth strategy they've got is paying tiktokers to demo features. Either AI is about to deliver the greatest economic transformation in human history, or we're watching the most expensive corporate Hail Mary ever thrown. And the fact that they need to pay half a million dollars per influencer to convince you it's the first one isn't a good sign.

Ricardo

725,581 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

In 45 years on Wall Street, I've never seen anything like this. Sam Altman just convinced 3 of the world's smartest investors to fund his losses. $110 billion. But ZERO profit in sight. The largest private funding round in history. Let me explain why this is borderline criminal & what you have to understand as an investor: Amazon. Nvidia. SoftBank. 3 of the world's most sophisticated investors just handed OpenAI $110 billion at an $840 billion valuation. That's more than double the $40 billion OpenAI raised last year. For context: all US venture capital combined invested $170 billion into American startups in all of 2023. Altman just raised 65% of that. Alone. In one round. And the company STILL isn't profitable. Let's look at the actual numbers: OpenAI burned $8 billion in 2025. They project burning $17 billion in 2026. $35 billion in 2027. $47 billion in 2028. Cumulative losses before any projected path to profitability: over $115 billion. Meanwhile, Amazon's $50 billion comes with strings attached. $35 billion is contingent on OpenAI either achieving AGI or completing its IPO by year end. Read that again. $35 billion is conditioned on ACHIEVING AGI. They're literally writing checks against a scientific breakthrough that may not happen on any predictable timeline. This is what peak cycle financing looks like. The circular logic every investor should understand: Amazon invests $50 billion in OpenAI. OpenAI commits to spending $100 billion on Amazon Web Services. Nvidia invests $30 billion. OpenAI commits to buying 3 gigawatts of Nvidia compute. These aren't arms-length investments. They're vendor financing dressed up as venture capital. Amazon and Nvidia are essentially paying OpenAI to buy their own products. The $840 billion valuation prices in a future that doesn't exist yet. At $13 billion in 2025 revenue, that's 65x revenue. Even in 2021 - the most speculative bubble in recent tech history - Snowflake peaked at 50-80x revenue. And Snowflake was actually profitable. J.P. Morgan calculates that the AI industry needs $650 billion in annual revenue just to generate a 10% return on total infrastructure buildout. The entire industry currently generates a fraction of that. I've seen cycles my entire 45-year career. The 1980s defense build-up. The dot-com bubble. The 2008 mortgage machine. The pattern is always the same: When the biggest players start financing each other's growth through circular investment structures, you're not witnessing a revolution... You're watching the LAST PHASE of a credit cycle. Amazon CEO Andy Jassy said OpenAI is going to be "one of the very big winners long term." Maybe. But $840 billion assumes they've already won. Stock prices follow earnings. Always have. Always will. And right now, OpenAI's earnings are deeply, structurally, massively negative. The IPO is coming. The hype will peak. And the question every serious investor needs to answer is simple: At what price does this actually make sense? Sam Altman doesn’t know either - he just keeps raising money faster than he can burn it. This can’t end well.
1:14

In 45 years on Wall Street, I've never seen anything like this. Sam Altman just convinced 3 of the world's smartest investors to fund his losses. $110 billion. But ZERO profit in sight. The largest private funding round in history. Let me explain why this is borderline criminal & what you have to understand as an investor: Amazon. Nvidia. SoftBank. 3 of the world's most sophisticated investors just handed OpenAI $110 billion at an $840 billion valuation. That's more than double the $40 billion OpenAI raised last year. For context: all US venture capital combined invested $170 billion into American startups in all of 2023. Altman just raised 65% of that. Alone. In one round. And the company STILL isn't profitable. Let's look at the actual numbers: OpenAI burned $8 billion in 2025. They project burning $17 billion in 2026. $35 billion in 2027. $47 billion in 2028. Cumulative losses before any projected path to profitability: over $115 billion. Meanwhile, Amazon's $50 billion comes with strings attached. $35 billion is contingent on OpenAI either achieving AGI or completing its IPO by year end. Read that again. $35 billion is conditioned on ACHIEVING AGI. They're literally writing checks against a scientific breakthrough that may not happen on any predictable timeline. This is what peak cycle financing looks like. The circular logic every investor should understand: Amazon invests $50 billion in OpenAI. OpenAI commits to spending $100 billion on Amazon Web Services. Nvidia invests $30 billion. OpenAI commits to buying 3 gigawatts of Nvidia compute. These aren't arms-length investments. They're vendor financing dressed up as venture capital. Amazon and Nvidia are essentially paying OpenAI to buy their own products. The $840 billion valuation prices in a future that doesn't exist yet. At $13 billion in 2025 revenue, that's 65x revenue. Even in 2021 - the most speculative bubble in recent tech history - Snowflake peaked at 50-80x revenue. And Snowflake was actually profitable. J.P. Morgan calculates that the AI industry needs $650 billion in annual revenue just to generate a 10% return on total infrastructure buildout. The entire industry currently generates a fraction of that. I've seen cycles my entire 45-year career. The 1980s defense build-up. The dot-com bubble. The 2008 mortgage machine. The pattern is always the same: When the biggest players start financing each other's growth through circular investment structures, you're not witnessing a revolution... You're watching the LAST PHASE of a credit cycle. Amazon CEO Andy Jassy said OpenAI is going to be "one of the very big winners long term." Maybe. But $840 billion assumes they've already won. Stock prices follow earnings. Always have. Always will. And right now, OpenAI's earnings are deeply, structurally, massively negative. The IPO is coming. The hype will peak. And the question every serious investor needs to answer is simple: At what price does this actually make sense? Sam Altman doesn’t know either - he just keeps raising money faster than he can burn it. This can’t end well.

George Noble

1,197,555 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

What's happening right now in our capital markets is going to DESTROY the retirement savings of millions of Americans. Anyone of good conscience needs to rise up and say enough. This must be stopped. I don't say that lightly. I've been doing this for 45 years, and what's happening right now to the integrity of our capital markets is unlike anything I have ever seen. This is not about Elon Musk or Donald Trump. This is not about whether you like rockets or hate rockets. This is about the systematic CORRUPTION of the financial system that every American depends on for their retirement. In the entirety of its existence, Tesla has generated approximately $36 billion in cumulative profit. That includes over $20 billion in government emission credits and tax subsidies. The company is valued at $1.7 trillion and its CEO is the richest man on the planet. I'm not talking about the stock price. I know the stock has made people money. That's the popularity contest. I'm talking about whether this company creates enough economic value to JUSTIFY the capital invested in it. And it doesn't. The returns on invested capital have been chronically below what any serious investor would demand. That's not wealth creation. So the product here isn't the car. The product is the STOCK PRICE. Elon Musk is selling hopium and an entire generation of investors is buying it without even knowing what a PE ratio is. I posted two pieces recently on Tesla and SpaceX. Each got over 1.5 million impressions. Thousands of hate replies but NOT ONE response with an actual argument. Not one. It was all "Libtard" and "Elon derangement syndrome." You would not get past a first-round interview at Fidelity thinking this way. But Tesla is just the opening act... SpaceX just filed for a $1.75 TRILLION IPO. $15 billion in revenue but no profit in sight. The private valuation was walked up from $200 billion to $400 billion to $800 billion to $1.75 trillion in two years. And Reuters has confirmed that SpaceX made early inclusion in the Nasdaq-100 a necessary condition for listing on the exchange. Nasdaq obliged by adopting a "Fast Entry" rule in March that lets mega-cap IPOs join the index after just 15 trading days, completely exempt from the normal seasoning and liquidity requirements every other company had to meet. And this matters because over $600 billion in passive funds track the Nasdaq-100. Unlike the S&P 500, which still requires months of seasoning and stricter float thresholds, the Nasdaq-100 is now a 15-day on-ramp for trillion-dollar IPOs. Every ETF and mutual fund benchmarked to that index will be FORCED to buy SpaceX within weeks of it going public regardless of whether the valuation makes any sense. Your 401(k) is literally the exit liquidity. You don't even get a choice. The structure of the market makes you a participant whether you want to be or not. That's what makes this different from every other bubble in history... You can't opt out. And the agencies that were supposed to protect you from exactly this? They're doing NOTHING. Peter Lynch would always say the product is not the stock and the stock is not the product. Show me one Hall of Fame investor who ever made his fortune chasing hype. Lynch, Druckenmiller, Soros, Buffett, Griffin, Cohen. Not one of them managed money this way. It's only the cult on X who thinks momentum and greater fool is an investment strategy. As Buffett said, in the short run the market is a popularity contest. In the long run it's a weighing machine. This popularity contest has gone on longer than any I've witnessed in my career. But gravity always wins. And when it does, the people who forced your pension fund into a money-losing rocket company at 120x revenue will have a lot of explaining to do. This must stop. And it WILL stop. The only question is how much damage gets done first. Are you listening?
3:46

What's happening right now in our capital markets is going to DESTROY the retirement savings of millions of Americans. Anyone of good conscience needs to rise up and say enough. This must be stopped. I don't say that lightly. I've been doing this for 45 years, and what's happening right now to the integrity of our capital markets is unlike anything I have ever seen. This is not about Elon Musk or Donald Trump. This is not about whether you like rockets or hate rockets. This is about the systematic CORRUPTION of the financial system that every American depends on for their retirement. In the entirety of its existence, Tesla has generated approximately $36 billion in cumulative profit. That includes over $20 billion in government emission credits and tax subsidies. The company is valued at $1.7 trillion and its CEO is the richest man on the planet. I'm not talking about the stock price. I know the stock has made people money. That's the popularity contest. I'm talking about whether this company creates enough economic value to JUSTIFY the capital invested in it. And it doesn't. The returns on invested capital have been chronically below what any serious investor would demand. That's not wealth creation. So the product here isn't the car. The product is the STOCK PRICE. Elon Musk is selling hopium and an entire generation of investors is buying it without even knowing what a PE ratio is. I posted two pieces recently on Tesla and SpaceX. Each got over 1.5 million impressions. Thousands of hate replies but NOT ONE response with an actual argument. Not one. It was all "Libtard" and "Elon derangement syndrome." You would not get past a first-round interview at Fidelity thinking this way. But Tesla is just the opening act... SpaceX just filed for a $1.75 TRILLION IPO. $15 billion in revenue but no profit in sight. The private valuation was walked up from $200 billion to $400 billion to $800 billion to $1.75 trillion in two years. And Reuters has confirmed that SpaceX made early inclusion in the Nasdaq-100 a necessary condition for listing on the exchange. Nasdaq obliged by adopting a "Fast Entry" rule in March that lets mega-cap IPOs join the index after just 15 trading days, completely exempt from the normal seasoning and liquidity requirements every other company had to meet. And this matters because over $600 billion in passive funds track the Nasdaq-100. Unlike the S&P 500, which still requires months of seasoning and stricter float thresholds, the Nasdaq-100 is now a 15-day on-ramp for trillion-dollar IPOs. Every ETF and mutual fund benchmarked to that index will be FORCED to buy SpaceX within weeks of it going public regardless of whether the valuation makes any sense. Your 401(k) is literally the exit liquidity. You don't even get a choice. The structure of the market makes you a participant whether you want to be or not. That's what makes this different from every other bubble in history... You can't opt out. And the agencies that were supposed to protect you from exactly this? They're doing NOTHING. Peter Lynch would always say the product is not the stock and the stock is not the product. Show me one Hall of Fame investor who ever made his fortune chasing hype. Lynch, Druckenmiller, Soros, Buffett, Griffin, Cohen. Not one of them managed money this way. It's only the cult on X who thinks momentum and greater fool is an investment strategy. As Buffett said, in the short run the market is a popularity contest. In the long run it's a weighing machine. This popularity contest has gone on longer than any I've witnessed in my career. But gravity always wins. And when it does, the people who forced your pension fund into a money-losing rocket company at 120x revenue will have a lot of explaining to do. This must stop. And it WILL stop. The only question is how much damage gets done first. Are you listening?

George Noble

192,605 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад