正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

返回首页

🚨 THE AI TRADE JUST BROKE. Nasdaq 100 is down 10% from its record. Chips just closed lower four sessions in a row. The moment it turned was July 16. TSMC posted the best quarter in its history. Profit up 77%. Revenue up 33.7%. Then it raised 2026 capex...

0xNonceSense's profile picture

Nonzee

109,564 subscribers

17,990 次观看 • 17 天前 •via X (Twitter)

LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

🚨 THIS IS NOT THE TOP. THE EUPHORIA HAS NOT EVEN STARTED. S&P 500 just printed a new all-time high at $7,791. In the middle of the worst geopolitical crisis of the century. Oil at $80. The Strait of Hormuz blockaded. The US preparing for the next escalation. Nothing resolved. No objectives achieved. And the market rallies into all of it. Most people look at this and call it the top. They are early, and being early is the same as being wrong. Markets do not die quietly. They die in a blow-off. 1929: the Dow ran vertical in its final year before it broke. 1999: Nasdaq gained 86% in the twelve months before the top. 2021: everything went parabolic right before it ended. Every one of them looked insane months before the actual high. Every one of them destroyed the people who shorted the first new high. This is that phase. Liquidity is loose, war spending is real, and retail has not even shown up yet. The melt-up runs through 2027. That is when the euphoria peaks. That is when the crowd is fully in. And that is when the drop starts, from far higher than anyone shorting today expects. When equities rally through an unresolved energy shock, the eventual break is not slow. It is vertical. But it comes after the euphoria, not before it. I called every top and bottom for 15 years, including the $15,768 Bitcoin bottom and the $126,162 top. I am not short here. I am riding this until the crowd stops doubting it. When I exit the market completely, I post it here publicly, like I always do. Turn notifications on. If you are not following yet, you will understand why that was a mistake later.
0:32

🚨 THIS IS NOT THE TOP. THE EUPHORIA HAS NOT EVEN STARTED. S&P 500 just printed a new all-time high at $7,791. In the middle of the worst geopolitical crisis of the century. Oil at $80. The Strait of Hormuz blockaded. The US preparing for the next escalation. Nothing resolved. No objectives achieved. And the market rallies into all of it. Most people look at this and call it the top. They are early, and being early is the same as being wrong. Markets do not die quietly. They die in a blow-off. 1929: the Dow ran vertical in its final year before it broke. 1999: Nasdaq gained 86% in the twelve months before the top. 2021: everything went parabolic right before it ended. Every one of them looked insane months before the actual high. Every one of them destroyed the people who shorted the first new high. This is that phase. Liquidity is loose, war spending is real, and retail has not even shown up yet. The melt-up runs through 2027. That is when the euphoria peaks. That is when the crowd is fully in. And that is when the drop starts, from far higher than anyone shorting today expects. When equities rally through an unresolved energy shock, the eventual break is not slow. It is vertical. But it comes after the euphoria, not before it. I called every top and bottom for 15 years, including the $15,768 Bitcoin bottom and the $126,162 top. I am not short here. I am riding this until the crowd stops doubting it. When I exit the market completely, I post it here publicly, like I always do. Turn notifications on. If you are not following yet, you will understand why that was a mistake later.

Nonzee

84,833 次观看 • 10 天前

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 次观看 • 2 个月前

THIS BUBBLE IS WORSE THAN 2000 If you have money in the stock market, read this carefully. The market is climbing while liquidity gets pulled out underneath it. Now look at valuations. Shiller CAPE: 42.05. The only time it was higher was 1999, right before the dot-com crash. Buffett Indicator: 229.9%. In 2000, it was 146%. That means today’s market is 1.6x higher than the dot-com peak by that metric. Buffett is sitting on $325B in cash and selling stocks. He is not guessing. He is reading the same math. Now concentration. Top 10 stocks control 41% of the S&P 500. They generate only 32% of profits. In 2000, top concentration was 23%. This is not a diversified index anymore. It is a crowded bet on a handful of companies, and most of them are tied to the same AI story. Now add leverage. Margin debt hit $1.28T. That is 4.1% of GDP. In 2000, it was 2.7%. Investors are borrowing more to buy stocks than they did at the dot-com peak. And the reversal may have already started. Margin debt peaked in January 2026 and dropped 4.5% in two months. The S&P dropped 5.9% in the same window. Last time margin debt rolled before the market? 2000. 2007. Every time, the market followed. Now look at AI. In 2000, telecom companies spent billions building fiber for “the internet future.” Capex hit 4.5% of GDP. Today, hyperscalers are spending on data centers for “the AI future.” Tech capex is 4.4% of GDP. Almost the same number. Back then, Lucent and Nortel helped finance customers who bought their equipment. Today, Nvidia invests in companies that buy Nvidia chips. Same loop. Different label. In 2000, the bubble was internet infrastructure. In 2026, it is AI infrastructure. The companies are bigger now. The spending is bigger. The index concentration is worse. The leverage is higher. And the market is priced like the returns are already guaranteed. That is the danger. If one major earnings report shows AI spending is not paying off, the repricing starts. And with 41% of the index sitting in the same trade, there is nowhere clean to hide. That’s why I’m watching this situation very closely right now. When the next move becomes clear, I’ll post it here first. Follow and turn notifications on.
0:38

THIS BUBBLE IS WORSE THAN 2000 If you have money in the stock market, read this carefully. The market is climbing while liquidity gets pulled out underneath it. Now look at valuations. Shiller CAPE: 42.05. The only time it was higher was 1999, right before the dot-com crash. Buffett Indicator: 229.9%. In 2000, it was 146%. That means today’s market is 1.6x higher than the dot-com peak by that metric. Buffett is sitting on $325B in cash and selling stocks. He is not guessing. He is reading the same math. Now concentration. Top 10 stocks control 41% of the S&P 500. They generate only 32% of profits. In 2000, top concentration was 23%. This is not a diversified index anymore. It is a crowded bet on a handful of companies, and most of them are tied to the same AI story. Now add leverage. Margin debt hit $1.28T. That is 4.1% of GDP. In 2000, it was 2.7%. Investors are borrowing more to buy stocks than they did at the dot-com peak. And the reversal may have already started. Margin debt peaked in January 2026 and dropped 4.5% in two months. The S&P dropped 5.9% in the same window. Last time margin debt rolled before the market? 2000. 2007. Every time, the market followed. Now look at AI. In 2000, telecom companies spent billions building fiber for “the internet future.” Capex hit 4.5% of GDP. Today, hyperscalers are spending on data centers for “the AI future.” Tech capex is 4.4% of GDP. Almost the same number. Back then, Lucent and Nortel helped finance customers who bought their equipment. Today, Nvidia invests in companies that buy Nvidia chips. Same loop. Different label. In 2000, the bubble was internet infrastructure. In 2026, it is AI infrastructure. The companies are bigger now. The spending is bigger. The index concentration is worse. The leverage is higher. And the market is priced like the returns are already guaranteed. That is the danger. If one major earnings report shows AI spending is not paying off, the repricing starts. And with 41% of the index sitting in the same trade, there is nowhere clean to hide. That’s why I’m watching this situation very closely right now. When the next move becomes clear, I’ll post it here first. Follow and turn notifications on.

Nonzee

83,631 次观看 • 3 个月前

🚨 THIS IS NOT NORMAL Is the AI bubble finally bursting? Samsung just posted the greatest quarterly profit in tech history. ₩89.4 trillion ($58.4 billion), up 1,810% year over year. The stock fell 7.70% anyway, now down -23.74% from its peak in just 15 days. Here is the alarming part. The market already knew these numbers were coming. Analysts, institutions, and retail investors had been positioning for this quarter for months. The moment the numbers confirmed what everyone already expected, there was nobody left to buy. That is what a fully priced market looks like. When the best earnings in corporate history produce a crash, it means the AI trade has run out of buyers at these levels. Keep in mind: I’ve called every major market top and bottom for over 10 YEARS. I was one of the only people who called the top in October, and I’ll do it again, that’s literally my job. If you still haven’t followed me, you’ll regret it.
0:30

🚨 THIS IS NOT NORMAL Is the AI bubble finally bursting? Samsung just posted the greatest quarterly profit in tech history. ₩89.4 trillion ($58.4 billion), up 1,810% year over year. The stock fell 7.70% anyway, now down -23.74% from its peak in just 15 days. Here is the alarming part. The market already knew these numbers were coming. Analysts, institutions, and retail investors had been positioning for this quarter for months. The moment the numbers confirmed what everyone already expected, there was nobody left to buy. That is what a fully priced market looks like. When the best earnings in corporate history produce a crash, it means the AI trade has run out of buyers at these levels. Keep in mind: I’ve called every major market top and bottom for over 10 YEARS. I was one of the only people who called the top in October, and I’ll do it again, that’s literally my job. If you still haven’t followed me, you’ll regret it.

DANNY

78,595 次观看 • 1 个月前

David Sacks: The Chip Stock Crash is Based on Momentum, NOT Fundamentals David Sacks: “That is the key question here, this correction in the markets, is it driven by fundamentals or is it driven by momentum? I think it's driven by momentum. Meaning that over the past year, you've had this roughly 10x run up in memory chip stocks, and you've seen this overall huge rise in any stock that's related to the AI boom. And I think it was inevitable that you'd see a pullback. I think there was something like a 10% pullback in the Nasdaq from the peak. But when you look at this momentum trade, it was down like 30% or 40%. You look at what happened in South Korea, you look at what happened with Leopold's fund, and obviously there was a lot of leverage behind this momentum trade, so when it corrects, it's going to be brutal. But I think that the question again is, does this reveal anything about the fundamentals? Is the CapEx that's being invested in the AI boom eventually going to deliver ROI, or is this some sort of bubble? I think there will be a return on all of this CapEx, and this is temporary market volatility amplified by leverage.”
1:01

David Sacks: The Chip Stock Crash is Based on Momentum, NOT Fundamentals David Sacks: “That is the key question here, this correction in the markets, is it driven by fundamentals or is it driven by momentum? I think it's driven by momentum. Meaning that over the past year, you've had this roughly 10x run up in memory chip stocks, and you've seen this overall huge rise in any stock that's related to the AI boom. And I think it was inevitable that you'd see a pullback. I think there was something like a 10% pullback in the Nasdaq from the peak. But when you look at this momentum trade, it was down like 30% or 40%. You look at what happened in South Korea, you look at what happened with Leopold's fund, and obviously there was a lot of leverage behind this momentum trade, so when it corrects, it's going to be brutal. But I think that the question again is, does this reveal anything about the fundamentals? Is the CapEx that's being invested in the AI boom eventually going to deliver ROI, or is this some sort of bubble? I think there will be a return on all of this CapEx, and this is temporary market volatility amplified by leverage.”

The All-In Podcast

55,344 次观看 • 17 天前

🚨 SOMETHING VERY BAD IS HAPPENING The stock market keeps making new all-time highs. OpenAI and Anthropic are now worth $2.1T. That is 10% of the entire Nasdaq. Look at the math: – $450B burned per year – $50B in actual revenue The entire AI bull case depends on one assumption: Inference gets cheaper. That is how funds justify the math. Spend massively today, scale later, margins explode when inference costs collapse. But that assumption is breaking: - Memory is getting expensive. - Compute is not getting cheap fast enough. - Inference is not falling the way everyone modeled. And if inference does not get dramatically cheaper, the whole AI margin story starts to crack. The loop is obvious: – Big players fund each other – Partnerships look perfect on paper – Revenue moves around inside the same system Everyone calls it growth. I call it the final stage of mania. In 2000, companies added “.com” to the name and valuations exploded: – Small profits – Massive valuations – Perfect stories Then reality hit. Nasdaq collapsed 80%. Now companies add “AI” to the name and reprice instantly: – Small profits – Massive valuations – Perfect AI stories This is the dot-com bubble with better AI branding. And bubbles do not warn you before they break. They break when everyone thinks the story is untouchable. Turn notifications on. The next move won’t wait for you.
0:43

🚨 SOMETHING VERY BAD IS HAPPENING The stock market keeps making new all-time highs. OpenAI and Anthropic are now worth $2.1T. That is 10% of the entire Nasdaq. Look at the math: – $450B burned per year – $50B in actual revenue The entire AI bull case depends on one assumption: Inference gets cheaper. That is how funds justify the math. Spend massively today, scale later, margins explode when inference costs collapse. But that assumption is breaking: - Memory is getting expensive. - Compute is not getting cheap fast enough. - Inference is not falling the way everyone modeled. And if inference does not get dramatically cheaper, the whole AI margin story starts to crack. The loop is obvious: – Big players fund each other – Partnerships look perfect on paper – Revenue moves around inside the same system Everyone calls it growth. I call it the final stage of mania. In 2000, companies added “.com” to the name and valuations exploded: – Small profits – Massive valuations – Perfect stories Then reality hit. Nasdaq collapsed 80%. Now companies add “AI” to the name and reprice instantly: – Small profits – Massive valuations – Perfect AI stories This is the dot-com bubble with better AI branding. And bubbles do not warn you before they break. They break when everyone thinks the story is untouchable. Turn notifications on. The next move won’t wait for you.

Nonzee

160,648 次观看 • 3 个月前

Micron is going to $4,000 and here is why (Save this). For 25 years, DRAM prices did one thing, they went down. Memory makers overbuilt, supply overwhelmed demand, buyers had all the negotiating leverage and that commodity trap crushed memory stocks every single cycle. What you are watching right now is a complete structural break from that 25 year trend. DRAM contract prices are up 700% year over year and the reason is AI and it is not going away. HBM3 was 12 layers, HBM4 in production and shipping now to Nvidia's latest GPUs is 16 layers. Each generation consumes significantly more wafer to produce than the last, meaning supply structurally tightens as the technology advances. Memory was 8% of hyperscaler capex in 2023 but is 35% in 2026 and is projected to hit 48% in 2027. Nearly half of everything Microsoft, Amazon, Google, and Meta spend on infrastructure will go to memory by next year. Going from the GB300 to the Vera Rubin 200 generation, GPU cost went up 57% while memory cost went up 435%. There are three companies on earth that can make DRAM at scale, Samsung, SK Hynix, and Micron. Both Samsung and SK Hynix are converting capacity to HBM which means conventional DRAM supply tightens further for everything else, and Micron captures pricing on both sides. Micron guided to $33.5 billion for Q3 and they reported $41.46 billion, a $7.96 billion beat, the largest earnings beat in the company's history. Gross margins came in at 85% above the 81% they guided. For Q4, they are now guiding to $50 billion in revenue with ~86% gross margins and $31 EPS. At $112 EPS in FY2027, the pre-earnings consensus and a 35x multiple, that is a $3,920 stock but with Q4 guiding to $31 EPS alone in a single quarter, FY2027 estimates will be revised meaningfully higher. Deutsche Bank says the supply-demand gap worsens through all of 2027 and into 2028. The market still thinks this is a cyclical bounce but this is far from it. This is the first chapters of a multi year repricing of the most critical component in the AI economy and Micron is at the center of it. Follow me Melvin for more AI, semis, and the next big market themes.
4:08

Micron is going to $4,000 and here is why (Save this). For 25 years, DRAM prices did one thing, they went down. Memory makers overbuilt, supply overwhelmed demand, buyers had all the negotiating leverage and that commodity trap crushed memory stocks every single cycle. What you are watching right now is a complete structural break from that 25 year trend. DRAM contract prices are up 700% year over year and the reason is AI and it is not going away. HBM3 was 12 layers, HBM4 in production and shipping now to Nvidia's latest GPUs is 16 layers. Each generation consumes significantly more wafer to produce than the last, meaning supply structurally tightens as the technology advances. Memory was 8% of hyperscaler capex in 2023 but is 35% in 2026 and is projected to hit 48% in 2027. Nearly half of everything Microsoft, Amazon, Google, and Meta spend on infrastructure will go to memory by next year. Going from the GB300 to the Vera Rubin 200 generation, GPU cost went up 57% while memory cost went up 435%. There are three companies on earth that can make DRAM at scale, Samsung, SK Hynix, and Micron. Both Samsung and SK Hynix are converting capacity to HBM which means conventional DRAM supply tightens further for everything else, and Micron captures pricing on both sides. Micron guided to $33.5 billion for Q3 and they reported $41.46 billion, a $7.96 billion beat, the largest earnings beat in the company's history. Gross margins came in at 85% above the 81% they guided. For Q4, they are now guiding to $50 billion in revenue with ~86% gross margins and $31 EPS. At $112 EPS in FY2027, the pre-earnings consensus and a 35x multiple, that is a $3,920 stock but with Q4 guiding to $31 EPS alone in a single quarter, FY2027 estimates will be revised meaningfully higher. Deutsche Bank says the supply-demand gap worsens through all of 2027 and into 2028. The market still thinks this is a cyclical bounce but this is far from it. This is the first chapters of a multi year repricing of the most critical component in the AI economy and Micron is at the center of it. Follow me Melvin for more AI, semis, and the next big market themes.

Melvin

93,627 次观看 • 1 个月前

The largest IPO in history is also shaping up to be the largest exit liquidity operation in history SpaceX went public at more than 90x revenue, and the insiders who bought in at a fraction of today's price are about to start selling their shares to you. Let me walk you through why this IPO is built to separate retail investors from their money: SpaceX has NEVER turned a profit and lost close to $5 billion last year. At the offering you were paying more than 90x revenue and at the peak the market briefly valued it near 140x. 30 years ago the head of Sun Microsystems explained in detail why paying even 10x revenue almost always ends in tears, and he was right. But listen closely, because the valuation is not even the real story. The scarcity is what CREATED this valuation in the first place, and the calendar that kills the scarcity is what kills the price. Less than 5% of SpaceX shares were actually available to trade at the IPO. Then the index committees REWROTE their own rules to fast track the stock into the Nasdaq 100 just 15 trading days after listing, which forced every passive fund and index ETF in the country to buy at the exact moment the float was at its tightest. The Nasdaq inclusion alone forced an estimated $4.3 billion of buying, and the Russell reweighting added roughly $3 billion more. The supply was minuscule and the buying was mandatory. That's a manufactured squeeze, and it is why the stock went above $225 in its first week. Now watch what happens next, because this is the part they ain't explaining to you: The lockup was staggered on purpose, and the entire schedule is sitting in the prospectus for anyone who bothers to read it. In early August, right after Q2 earnings, 20% of the locked shares come free. Another 10% unlocks early if the stock trades 30% above the $135 IPO price going into the report. Then tranches of 7% hit the market at 70, 90, 105, 120 and 135 days after the IPO, which means fresh insider supply lands roughly every 2 to 3 weeks from late August through late October. Q3 earnings triggers the single biggest release of all, another 28%, roughly 1.3 billion shares. On December 8 the 180 day lockup expires entirely. And on June 12, 2027 comes the final wave, when Musk's own 6.4 billion shares, 42% of the whole company, become sellable for the first time. Add it all up and insiders could be free to sell as much as 44% of the company by early September, which would balloon the tradable float by roughly 900%. All of that supply lands on a stock the company deliberately packed with retail, because SpaceX reserved close to 30% of the offering for individual investors vs the usual 10%. This deal created over 4,400 paper millionaires inside the company. You think none of them are looking to cash out? Early holders are already loading up on puts to lock in what they have. First they keep the float tiny. Then they let the index rules force the world to buy at the top. Then they release a flood of insider stock into a crowd of retail buyers who were handed the shares up high. When the price finally breaks the offering level, the people who got in years ago at pennies on today's dollar will hit the bid, and the exit liquidity is your retirement account. And what are you actually left holding? Strip away the science fiction and the only business inside SpaceX that reliably earns money is Starlink, which produced $1.2 billion of operating income last quarter. A wonderful business worth hundreds of billions on its best day. NOT $2 trillion. Serious fair value work lands around $30 a share. Nobody has been a bigger bear on this deal than me. I called it out the moment it started trading, and it is already playing out on schedule as the shares have given back the entire squeeze and slipped below their opening print. I was Peter Lynch's auto analyst back in 1981 and I have watched every disaster since, and I am telling you this is one of the great wealth transfers of my lifetime packed into a fancy narrative. Tesla was the biggest misallocation of capital in the history of stock markets. SpaceX may have just surpassed it. SPCX goes straight onto my short list, and the beauty of this setup is that the catalyst is not a guess or something, it is literally a PUBLISHED CALENDAR. This is the most grossly overpriced stock at scale that I have ever seen.
2:11

The largest IPO in history is also shaping up to be the largest exit liquidity operation in history SpaceX went public at more than 90x revenue, and the insiders who bought in at a fraction of today's price are about to start selling their shares to you. Let me walk you through why this IPO is built to separate retail investors from their money: SpaceX has NEVER turned a profit and lost close to $5 billion last year. At the offering you were paying more than 90x revenue and at the peak the market briefly valued it near 140x. 30 years ago the head of Sun Microsystems explained in detail why paying even 10x revenue almost always ends in tears, and he was right. But listen closely, because the valuation is not even the real story. The scarcity is what CREATED this valuation in the first place, and the calendar that kills the scarcity is what kills the price. Less than 5% of SpaceX shares were actually available to trade at the IPO. Then the index committees REWROTE their own rules to fast track the stock into the Nasdaq 100 just 15 trading days after listing, which forced every passive fund and index ETF in the country to buy at the exact moment the float was at its tightest. The Nasdaq inclusion alone forced an estimated $4.3 billion of buying, and the Russell reweighting added roughly $3 billion more. The supply was minuscule and the buying was mandatory. That's a manufactured squeeze, and it is why the stock went above $225 in its first week. Now watch what happens next, because this is the part they ain't explaining to you: The lockup was staggered on purpose, and the entire schedule is sitting in the prospectus for anyone who bothers to read it. In early August, right after Q2 earnings, 20% of the locked shares come free. Another 10% unlocks early if the stock trades 30% above the $135 IPO price going into the report. Then tranches of 7% hit the market at 70, 90, 105, 120 and 135 days after the IPO, which means fresh insider supply lands roughly every 2 to 3 weeks from late August through late October. Q3 earnings triggers the single biggest release of all, another 28%, roughly 1.3 billion shares. On December 8 the 180 day lockup expires entirely. And on June 12, 2027 comes the final wave, when Musk's own 6.4 billion shares, 42% of the whole company, become sellable for the first time. Add it all up and insiders could be free to sell as much as 44% of the company by early September, which would balloon the tradable float by roughly 900%. All of that supply lands on a stock the company deliberately packed with retail, because SpaceX reserved close to 30% of the offering for individual investors vs the usual 10%. This deal created over 4,400 paper millionaires inside the company. You think none of them are looking to cash out? Early holders are already loading up on puts to lock in what they have. First they keep the float tiny. Then they let the index rules force the world to buy at the top. Then they release a flood of insider stock into a crowd of retail buyers who were handed the shares up high. When the price finally breaks the offering level, the people who got in years ago at pennies on today's dollar will hit the bid, and the exit liquidity is your retirement account. And what are you actually left holding? Strip away the science fiction and the only business inside SpaceX that reliably earns money is Starlink, which produced $1.2 billion of operating income last quarter. A wonderful business worth hundreds of billions on its best day. NOT $2 trillion. Serious fair value work lands around $30 a share. Nobody has been a bigger bear on this deal than me. I called it out the moment it started trading, and it is already playing out on schedule as the shares have given back the entire squeeze and slipped below their opening print. I was Peter Lynch's auto analyst back in 1981 and I have watched every disaster since, and I am telling you this is one of the great wealth transfers of my lifetime packed into a fancy narrative. Tesla was the biggest misallocation of capital in the history of stock markets. SpaceX may have just surpassed it. SPCX goes straight onto my short list, and the beauty of this setup is that the catalyst is not a guess or something, it is literally a PUBLISHED CALENDAR. This is the most grossly overpriced stock at scale that I have ever seen.

George Noble

348,852 次观看 • 1 个月前

🚨 IS THE AI BUBBLE FINALLY BURSTING? Samsung just posted the greatest quarterly profit in tech history. ₩89.4 trillion ($58.4 billion), up 1,810% year over year. The stock fell 7.70% anyway, now down -23.74% from its peak in just 15 days. Here is the alarming part. The market already knew these numbers were coming. Analysts, institutions, and retail investors had been positioning for this quarter for months. The moment the numbers confirmed what everyone already expected, there was nobody left to buy. That is what a fully priced market looks like. When the best earnings in corporate history produce a crash, it means the AI trade has run out of buyers at these levels.
0:43

🚨 IS THE AI BUBBLE FINALLY BURSTING? Samsung just posted the greatest quarterly profit in tech history. ₩89.4 trillion ($58.4 billion), up 1,810% year over year. The stock fell 7.70% anyway, now down -23.74% from its peak in just 15 days. Here is the alarming part. The market already knew these numbers were coming. Analysts, institutions, and retail investors had been positioning for this quarter for months. The moment the numbers confirmed what everyone already expected, there was nobody left to buy. That is what a fully priced market looks like. When the best earnings in corporate history produce a crash, it means the AI trade has run out of buyers at these levels.

Crypto Rover

121,935 次观看 • 1 个月前

🚨 WARNING: SOMETHING VERY WIERD IS HAPPENING. The S&P 500 keeps printing new highs. Everyone is celebrating. Nobody is looking at what's actually holding it up. Semiconductor stocks are now worth $13.4 trillion. 19.7% of the entire index. Five years ago that number was closer to 5%. It quadrupled in a single cycle on a single bet. AI. And here's the number that should concern everyone. AI chips generate 50% of all semiconductor revenue. They represent less than 0.2% of total chip shipments. Half the revenue, a fraction of the volume, trillions in market cap sitting on top of a sliver of actual production. Three companies are carrying all of it. Nvidia. Broadcom. TSMC. The same names in every major institutional portfolio simultaneously. Everyone owns them, nobody can afford to be the first one out. And the way the money moves inside this system should sound familiar. Big players fund AI startups. AI startups spend that money on Big Tech infrastructure. Big Tech reports record AI revenue. Valuations justify the next round, the same dollar completes the loop and gets counted as growth every time. We watched this exact dynamic play out once before. 2000. A handful of tech companies carried the entire market. Valuations made no sense, narratives did the work that fundamentals couldn't. Then one company missed earnings, then another, then the S&P lost 50% and the Nasdaq lost 78%. The current setup is more concentrated, the valuations are more extreme. And one cut in AI spending is all it takes to start the unwind. I called the $16K Bitcoin bottom. I called the $126K top. Every major turn for 15 years public, before the move. The next call is already forming. Follow now and turn on notifications, you'll understand why that matters sooner than you think.
0:34

🚨 WARNING: SOMETHING VERY WIERD IS HAPPENING. The S&P 500 keeps printing new highs. Everyone is celebrating. Nobody is looking at what's actually holding it up. Semiconductor stocks are now worth $13.4 trillion. 19.7% of the entire index. Five years ago that number was closer to 5%. It quadrupled in a single cycle on a single bet. AI. And here's the number that should concern everyone. AI chips generate 50% of all semiconductor revenue. They represent less than 0.2% of total chip shipments. Half the revenue, a fraction of the volume, trillions in market cap sitting on top of a sliver of actual production. Three companies are carrying all of it. Nvidia. Broadcom. TSMC. The same names in every major institutional portfolio simultaneously. Everyone owns them, nobody can afford to be the first one out. And the way the money moves inside this system should sound familiar. Big players fund AI startups. AI startups spend that money on Big Tech infrastructure. Big Tech reports record AI revenue. Valuations justify the next round, the same dollar completes the loop and gets counted as growth every time. We watched this exact dynamic play out once before. 2000. A handful of tech companies carried the entire market. Valuations made no sense, narratives did the work that fundamentals couldn't. Then one company missed earnings, then another, then the S&P lost 50% and the Nasdaq lost 78%. The current setup is more concentrated, the valuations are more extreme. And one cut in AI spending is all it takes to start the unwind. I called the $16K Bitcoin bottom. I called the $126K top. Every major turn for 15 years public, before the move. The next call is already forming. Follow now and turn on notifications, you'll understand why that matters sooner than you think.

Hanzo ㊗️

18,356 次观看 • 1 个月前

🚨 THE SPACEX PUMP JUST ARMED THE INSIDER SELL BUTTON. And almost nobody buying at $178 knows it. Here's what's actually happening. SpaceX IPO'd at $135 on June 12, eight days later it's at $178. Everyone is calling it the trade of the decade. Nobody is reading the fine print. 95% of shares are still locked. You're trading on 5% of total supply. A $2.35 trillion valuation set by a sliver of float that can be moved by relatively thin volume. Thin float pumps easy. It dumps the same way. Now the part that should concern everyone buying right now. There's a clause buried in the lockup agreement. An early unlock triggers automatically if the stock holds 30% above the $135 IPO price. 30% above $135 is $175.50. The stock is at $178. The rally didn't just create paper gains. It activated the mechanism that lets insiders sell early. Then the calendar gets worse. Late July into August first insider shares hit the market around Q2 earnings. December 8 - full 180-day lockup expires in tranches. June 2027 - Musk's 6.4 billion personal shares come free. A wall of supply, on a fixed schedule, already counting down. We've seen this exact movie before. Facebook IPO'd at $38 in 2012, Lockups expired. Four months later it was trading at $18. Half the value erased not because the company failed. Because supply showed up and buyers ran out. Now the math on SpaceX. $2.35 trillion valuation. $18.7 billion in 2025 revenue. 125x sales. And Musk's own projection for $1 trillion in revenue is dated "maybe by 2030." You're paying for that today In full Four years early. So ask yourself one question. Who is on the other side of your buy at $178? People who got in at $40. At $60. At $90. Insiders sitting on 3x, 4x, 5x gains who have been waiting years for exactly this window. They don't need the price higher. They need buyers to sell into. Right now that buyer is you. The rockets are real. The company is real. The technology is real. The trap is also real. At $178 you're either early to the exit or you are the exit. I called the SPX drops before they happened. I called BTC's top at $126K. I called the dump from $126K to $60K - publicly, before it moved. Every major call this cycle on the record, before the fact. The next ones are already loading. Follow now and turn on notifications. The unlock clock is already running - and when it hits, you'll want to have seen this post first.
0:43

🚨 THE SPACEX PUMP JUST ARMED THE INSIDER SELL BUTTON. And almost nobody buying at $178 knows it. Here's what's actually happening. SpaceX IPO'd at $135 on June 12, eight days later it's at $178. Everyone is calling it the trade of the decade. Nobody is reading the fine print. 95% of shares are still locked. You're trading on 5% of total supply. A $2.35 trillion valuation set by a sliver of float that can be moved by relatively thin volume. Thin float pumps easy. It dumps the same way. Now the part that should concern everyone buying right now. There's a clause buried in the lockup agreement. An early unlock triggers automatically if the stock holds 30% above the $135 IPO price. 30% above $135 is $175.50. The stock is at $178. The rally didn't just create paper gains. It activated the mechanism that lets insiders sell early. Then the calendar gets worse. Late July into August first insider shares hit the market around Q2 earnings. December 8 - full 180-day lockup expires in tranches. June 2027 - Musk's 6.4 billion personal shares come free. A wall of supply, on a fixed schedule, already counting down. We've seen this exact movie before. Facebook IPO'd at $38 in 2012, Lockups expired. Four months later it was trading at $18. Half the value erased not because the company failed. Because supply showed up and buyers ran out. Now the math on SpaceX. $2.35 trillion valuation. $18.7 billion in 2025 revenue. 125x sales. And Musk's own projection for $1 trillion in revenue is dated "maybe by 2030." You're paying for that today In full Four years early. So ask yourself one question. Who is on the other side of your buy at $178? People who got in at $40. At $60. At $90. Insiders sitting on 3x, 4x, 5x gains who have been waiting years for exactly this window. They don't need the price higher. They need buyers to sell into. Right now that buyer is you. The rockets are real. The company is real. The technology is real. The trap is also real. At $178 you're either early to the exit or you are the exit. I called the SPX drops before they happened. I called BTC's top at $126K. I called the dump from $126K to $60K - publicly, before it moved. Every major call this cycle on the record, before the fact. The next ones are already loading. Follow now and turn on notifications. The unlock clock is already running - and when it hits, you'll want to have seen this post first.

Phantom_Defi

295,218 次观看 • 1 个月前

🚨 THE SPACEX PUMP JUST ARMED THE INSIDER SELL BUTTON. And almost nobody buying at $178 knows it. Here's what's actually happening. SpaceX IPO'd at $135 on June 12, eight days later it's at $178. Everyone is calling it the trade of the decade. Nobody is reading the fine print. 95% of shares are still locked. You're trading on 5% of total supply. A $2.35 trillion valuation set by a sliver of float that can be moved by relatively thin volume. Thin float pumps easy. It dumps the same way. Now the part that should concern everyone buying right now. There's a clause buried in the lockup agreement. An early unlock triggers automatically if the stock holds 30% above the $135 IPO price. 30% above $135 is $175.50. The stock is at $178. The rally didn't just create paper gains. It activated the mechanism that lets insiders sell early. Then the calendar gets worse. Late July into August first insider shares hit the market around Q2 earnings. December 8 - full 180-day lockup expires in tranches. June 2027 - Musk's 6.4 billion personal shares come free. A wall of supply, on a fixed schedule, already counting down. We've seen this exact movie before. Facebook IPO'd at $38 in 2012, Lockups expired. Four months later it was trading at $18. Half the value erased not because the company failed. Because supply showed up and buyers ran out. Now the math on SpaceX. $2.35 trillion valuation. $18.7 billion in 2025 revenue. 125x sales. And Musk's own projection for $1 trillion in revenue is dated "maybe by 2030." You're paying for that today In full Four years early. So ask yourself one question. Who is on the other side of your buy at $178? People who got in at $40. At $60. At $90. Insiders sitting on 3x, 4x, 5x gains who have been waiting years for exactly this window. They don't need the price higher. They need buyers to sell into. Right now that buyer is you. The rockets are real. The company is real. The technology is real. The trap is also real. At $178 you're either early to the exit or you are the exit. I called the SPX drops before they happened. I called BTC's top at $126K. I called the dump from $126K to $60K - publicly, before it moved. Every major call this cycle on the record, before the fact. The next ones are already loading. Follow now and turn on notifications. The unlock clock is already running - and when it hits, you'll want to have seen this post first.
0:45

🚨 THE SPACEX PUMP JUST ARMED THE INSIDER SELL BUTTON. And almost nobody buying at $178 knows it. Here's what's actually happening. SpaceX IPO'd at $135 on June 12, eight days later it's at $178. Everyone is calling it the trade of the decade. Nobody is reading the fine print. 95% of shares are still locked. You're trading on 5% of total supply. A $2.35 trillion valuation set by a sliver of float that can be moved by relatively thin volume. Thin float pumps easy. It dumps the same way. Now the part that should concern everyone buying right now. There's a clause buried in the lockup agreement. An early unlock triggers automatically if the stock holds 30% above the $135 IPO price. 30% above $135 is $175.50. The stock is at $178. The rally didn't just create paper gains. It activated the mechanism that lets insiders sell early. Then the calendar gets worse. Late July into August first insider shares hit the market around Q2 earnings. December 8 - full 180-day lockup expires in tranches. June 2027 - Musk's 6.4 billion personal shares come free. A wall of supply, on a fixed schedule, already counting down. We've seen this exact movie before. Facebook IPO'd at $38 in 2012, Lockups expired. Four months later it was trading at $18. Half the value erased not because the company failed. Because supply showed up and buyers ran out. Now the math on SpaceX. $2.35 trillion valuation. $18.7 billion in 2025 revenue. 125x sales. And Musk's own projection for $1 trillion in revenue is dated "maybe by 2030." You're paying for that today In full Four years early. So ask yourself one question. Who is on the other side of your buy at $178? People who got in at $40. At $60. At $90. Insiders sitting on 3x, 4x, 5x gains who have been waiting years for exactly this window. They don't need the price higher. They need buyers to sell into. Right now that buyer is you. The rockets are real. The company is real. The technology is real. The trap is also real. At $178 you're either early to the exit or you are the exit. I called the SPX drops before they happened. I called BTC's top at $126K. I called the dump from $126K to $60K - publicly, before it moved. Every major call this cycle on the record, before the fact. The next ones are already loading. Follow now and turn on notifications. The unlock clock is already running - and when it hits, you'll want to have seen this post first.

philarekt

596,465 次观看 • 1 个月前

THE SPACEX IPO TRAP STARTS ON DAY 15 Day 1 is over- stock up 19%, retail is happy! If you're one of the people who bought SpaceX's IPO, read on Here is the real trap - and it's built into the calendar Nasdaq cut its own waiting period from 3 months to 15 days just for this deal On Day 15(June 26), SpaceX joins the Nasdaq 100 The moment it does, every QQQ fund on Earth is forced to buy automatically That's $22-27 billion in forced buying hitting the market on a single day Funds know this is coming - so they're selling everything else now to free up cash That selling pressure is already in the market Retail sees the pump and buys again - same mistake Then the real mechanics kick in 95% of shares sit with insiders who waited years for this moment Lock-ups expire in stages. Every quarter is a structured exit The stock doesn't crash - it just slowly bleeds while retail holds and hopes 6 months of dead money That's when institutions quietly accumulate at the price they actually wanted Not at $160. Not at the Day 15 spike At the price nobody wants to touch That's where I'll be buying The $126k top was called here. The $SPX distribution was called here. The SpaceX trap was posted before Day 1 The next entry will be posted here too - before it becomes obvious Follow now to not miss out on updates!
0:56

THE SPACEX IPO TRAP STARTS ON DAY 15 Day 1 is over- stock up 19%, retail is happy! If you're one of the people who bought SpaceX's IPO, read on Here is the real trap - and it's built into the calendar Nasdaq cut its own waiting period from 3 months to 15 days just for this deal On Day 15(June 26), SpaceX joins the Nasdaq 100 The moment it does, every QQQ fund on Earth is forced to buy automatically That's $22-27 billion in forced buying hitting the market on a single day Funds know this is coming - so they're selling everything else now to free up cash That selling pressure is already in the market Retail sees the pump and buys again - same mistake Then the real mechanics kick in 95% of shares sit with insiders who waited years for this moment Lock-ups expire in stages. Every quarter is a structured exit The stock doesn't crash - it just slowly bleeds while retail holds and hopes 6 months of dead money That's when institutions quietly accumulate at the price they actually wanted Not at $160. Not at the Day 15 spike At the price nobody wants to touch That's where I'll be buying The $126k top was called here. The $SPX distribution was called here. The SpaceX trap was posted before Day 1 The next entry will be posted here too - before it becomes obvious Follow now to not miss out on updates!

bee🐝

225,152 次观看 • 2 个月前

#WATCH | Delhi: When asked about his reaction on private capital expenditure (CAPEX) not coming in and growth is happening only because of Govt CAPEX over the last 3-4 years, Neelkanth Mishra, Executive Director for India at the World Bank Headquarters, says, "In the economy, investment to GDP, as reported by the CSO or the MoSPI, is 32% of GDP. Central government CAPEX is 3.2% of GDP. So the central government is one-tenth of overall CAPEX. Central government CAPEX as a percentage of GDP, in the last three years, has moved by 10 basis points. So you think that all of CAPEX is happening with the centre? Just because it is in the narrative and every media house is based in Delhi, it doesn't mean that the only central government is handling the economy. A large part of CAPEX happens when houses are built. Household CAPEX, capital formation, is where people add a room to their house or a floor to their house. Then someone gets a son who is married, someone, two brothers separate, and they build separate floors. Those are things which are at a population scale substantial for capital formation. Look at what is happening with steel. I mean, the other day I saw this compilation of some 100 million tons of steel capacity being planned in Odisha. That's massive. That is how CAPEX happens... CAPEX has picked up power generation. Corporate credit is starting to pick up. All these narratives that private CAPEX is not happening are like this..."
1:52

#WATCH | Delhi: When asked about his reaction on private capital expenditure (CAPEX) not coming in and growth is happening only because of Govt CAPEX over the last 3-4 years, Neelkanth Mishra, Executive Director for India at the World Bank Headquarters, says, "In the economy, investment to GDP, as reported by the CSO or the MoSPI, is 32% of GDP. Central government CAPEX is 3.2% of GDP. So the central government is one-tenth of overall CAPEX. Central government CAPEX as a percentage of GDP, in the last three years, has moved by 10 basis points. So you think that all of CAPEX is happening with the centre? Just because it is in the narrative and every media house is based in Delhi, it doesn't mean that the only central government is handling the economy. A large part of CAPEX happens when houses are built. Household CAPEX, capital formation, is where people add a room to their house or a floor to their house. Then someone gets a son who is married, someone, two brothers separate, and they build separate floors. Those are things which are at a population scale substantial for capital formation. Look at what is happening with steel. I mean, the other day I saw this compilation of some 100 million tons of steel capacity being planned in Odisha. That's massive. That is how CAPEX happens... CAPEX has picked up power generation. Corporate credit is starting to pick up. All these narratives that private CAPEX is not happening are like this..."

ANI

26,742 次观看 • 2 个月前

Indian IT is the only sector on earth being sold off for AI working, not for AI failing. The market treats Nvidia as proof AI works and Indian IT as proof it does not. It may be exactly backwards. - Nifty IT: down ~39% from its peak, now near 16x forward earnings. - TCS is cutting 12,000 jobs. Entry-level tech hiring fell 44% in a year. Nikhil Kamath laid out their bull math: disrupt 10% of the world's $50 trillion services economy, and that $5 trillion justifies the spend. The catch he left open: disrupting $5 trillion of services is not the same as capturing it. Indian IT is where that gap already shows. The disruption is landing as falling revenue, not a new profit pool. Better at delivery, worse at billing. The same labs said to be killing it, OpenAI and Anthropic, just partnered with TCS and Infosys to sell through them. One of these AI bets is mispriced. Maybe both. The canary is not in a Santa Clara data centre. It is on the NSE. | Credits: YouTube, WTF Podcast |
0:41

Indian IT is the only sector on earth being sold off for AI working, not for AI failing. The market treats Nvidia as proof AI works and Indian IT as proof it does not. It may be exactly backwards. - Nifty IT: down ~39% from its peak, now near 16x forward earnings. - TCS is cutting 12,000 jobs. Entry-level tech hiring fell 44% in a year. Nikhil Kamath laid out their bull math: disrupt 10% of the world's $50 trillion services economy, and that $5 trillion justifies the spend. The catch he left open: disrupting $5 trillion of services is not the same as capturing it. Indian IT is where that gap already shows. The disruption is landing as falling revenue, not a new profit pool. Better at delivery, worse at billing. The same labs said to be killing it, OpenAI and Anthropic, just partnered with TCS and Infosys to sell through them. One of these AI bets is mispriced. Maybe both. The canary is not in a Santa Clara data centre. It is on the NSE. | Credits: YouTube, WTF Podcast |

Vishnu Agarwal

97,220 次观看 • 1 个月前

BREAKING: Michael Burry just compared Nvidia to the company that lost 90% of its value in the dot-com crash and took 25 years to recover. "I stand by my analysis. I am not claiming Nvidia is Enron. It is clearly Cisco." Here's the most recent warning from the investor who called the 2008 crash: Michael Burry built his reputation on one trade. He saw the housing market collapse before anyone else and bet against it. "The Big Short" made him famous. Now he's looking at Nvidia. And he says it looks like Cisco in March 2000. That comparison is not a casual insult. Cisco was the most valuable company in the world at the peak of the dot-com bubble. Its valuation crossed $500 billion. Then the bubble burst. The stock fell roughly 90% from its 2000 peak. Its market cap collapsed to about $60 billion by 2002. And it took roughly 25 years for the stock to climb back to where it started. An entire generation of investors waited a quarter century just to break even. That is the company Burry is comparing Nvidia to. Now here is the number that triggered the warning. In Nvidia's fiscal 2026 results, the company disclosed its purchase obligations. These are the commitments Nvidia makes to its suppliers to lock in future manufacturing capacity. A year ago, that figure sat at $16.1 billion. This year it jumped to $95.2 billion. Total supply obligations now sit at roughly $117 billion. Nvidia is committing $117 billion to build capacity for demand that has not arrived yet. Burry's argument is simple. A company does not lock in $117 billion in supplier commitments unless it is betting the demand keeps climbing. If that demand slows even slightly, Nvidia is holding billions in obligations it cannot unwind. And that is exactly what happened to Cisco. Cisco overcommitted to supplier capacity expecting roughly 50% annual growth. Then tech spending slowed. The inventory piled up. The stock cratered. Burry is not calling Nvidia a fraud. He is not saying it is the next Enron. He is saying it could be the market's Cisco. The single stock that becomes the symbol of an AI spending unwind that drags everything down with it. And the dot-com comparison carries weight because of what happened to the broader market. When that bubble burst, the Nasdaq 100 fell 77%. The S&P 500 dropped 49%. It was not just one stock. It was the whole market. Now here is the other side of the argument. Nvidia's supporters say the Cisco comparison is too simple. Because Cisco was riding hype. Nvidia is riding actual revenue. Nvidia reported fiscal 2026 revenue of $215.9 billion, up 65% year over year. Data center revenue alone hit roughly $193.7 billion, up 68%. Record quarterly data center revenue of $62.3 billion in the fourth quarter, up 75%. These are not promises. These are realized sales, booked and collected. The bulls argue that pricing power and margins this strong do not exist inside a pure bubble. In their view, Burry is warning about a future slowdown that has not shown up in a single quarterly report. So the debate splits into two clean halves. The bears say the $117 billion in commitments makes Nvidia dangerously sensitive to any demand slowdown. The bulls say the revenue is real, the growth is accelerating, and the buildout is justified by the orders already on the books. Both sides are looking at the same company. Both sides are looking at the same numbers. They just disagree on what those numbers mean. And there is a second force pulling at this market that has nothing to do with Nvidia's earnings. A wave of mega-IPOs is reportedly coming. SpaceX. OpenAI. Anthropic. Some estimates suggest the market may need to absorb close to $200 billion in fresh equity supply. That creates a quieter question underneath the Burry debate. Even if AI demand stays strong, capital is finite. When the next wave of private giants goes public, money has to come from somewhere. And the easiest place to pull it from is the stock that already tripled. The real test is not whether Burry is right or wrong today. It is whether demand growth, margins, and contract utilization keep matching the $117 billion that Nvidia and its entire ecosystem are committing right now. If the demand keeps climbing, the commitments look like foresight. If it stalls, they look like Cisco. The man who saw the last crash before anyone else just put a name on the risk. A company that was once worth over $500 billion, then lost 90%, then made its investors wait 25 years to get back to even. The numbers say Nvidia is booking record revenue. The same numbers say Nvidia is committing $117 billion to a future nobody can see. One of those facts ages well. The other one is the entire question.
7:21

BREAKING: Michael Burry just compared Nvidia to the company that lost 90% of its value in the dot-com crash and took 25 years to recover. "I stand by my analysis. I am not claiming Nvidia is Enron. It is clearly Cisco." Here's the most recent warning from the investor who called the 2008 crash: Michael Burry built his reputation on one trade. He saw the housing market collapse before anyone else and bet against it. "The Big Short" made him famous. Now he's looking at Nvidia. And he says it looks like Cisco in March 2000. That comparison is not a casual insult. Cisco was the most valuable company in the world at the peak of the dot-com bubble. Its valuation crossed $500 billion. Then the bubble burst. The stock fell roughly 90% from its 2000 peak. Its market cap collapsed to about $60 billion by 2002. And it took roughly 25 years for the stock to climb back to where it started. An entire generation of investors waited a quarter century just to break even. That is the company Burry is comparing Nvidia to. Now here is the number that triggered the warning. In Nvidia's fiscal 2026 results, the company disclosed its purchase obligations. These are the commitments Nvidia makes to its suppliers to lock in future manufacturing capacity. A year ago, that figure sat at $16.1 billion. This year it jumped to $95.2 billion. Total supply obligations now sit at roughly $117 billion. Nvidia is committing $117 billion to build capacity for demand that has not arrived yet. Burry's argument is simple. A company does not lock in $117 billion in supplier commitments unless it is betting the demand keeps climbing. If that demand slows even slightly, Nvidia is holding billions in obligations it cannot unwind. And that is exactly what happened to Cisco. Cisco overcommitted to supplier capacity expecting roughly 50% annual growth. Then tech spending slowed. The inventory piled up. The stock cratered. Burry is not calling Nvidia a fraud. He is not saying it is the next Enron. He is saying it could be the market's Cisco. The single stock that becomes the symbol of an AI spending unwind that drags everything down with it. And the dot-com comparison carries weight because of what happened to the broader market. When that bubble burst, the Nasdaq 100 fell 77%. The S&P 500 dropped 49%. It was not just one stock. It was the whole market. Now here is the other side of the argument. Nvidia's supporters say the Cisco comparison is too simple. Because Cisco was riding hype. Nvidia is riding actual revenue. Nvidia reported fiscal 2026 revenue of $215.9 billion, up 65% year over year. Data center revenue alone hit roughly $193.7 billion, up 68%. Record quarterly data center revenue of $62.3 billion in the fourth quarter, up 75%. These are not promises. These are realized sales, booked and collected. The bulls argue that pricing power and margins this strong do not exist inside a pure bubble. In their view, Burry is warning about a future slowdown that has not shown up in a single quarterly report. So the debate splits into two clean halves. The bears say the $117 billion in commitments makes Nvidia dangerously sensitive to any demand slowdown. The bulls say the revenue is real, the growth is accelerating, and the buildout is justified by the orders already on the books. Both sides are looking at the same company. Both sides are looking at the same numbers. They just disagree on what those numbers mean. And there is a second force pulling at this market that has nothing to do with Nvidia's earnings. A wave of mega-IPOs is reportedly coming. SpaceX. OpenAI. Anthropic. Some estimates suggest the market may need to absorb close to $200 billion in fresh equity supply. That creates a quieter question underneath the Burry debate. Even if AI demand stays strong, capital is finite. When the next wave of private giants goes public, money has to come from somewhere. And the easiest place to pull it from is the stock that already tripled. The real test is not whether Burry is right or wrong today. It is whether demand growth, margins, and contract utilization keep matching the $117 billion that Nvidia and its entire ecosystem are committing right now. If the demand keeps climbing, the commitments look like foresight. If it stalls, they look like Cisco. The man who saw the last crash before anyone else just put a name on the risk. A company that was once worth over $500 billion, then lost 90%, then made its investors wait 25 years to get back to even. The numbers say Nvidia is booking record revenue. The same numbers say Nvidia is committing $117 billion to a future nobody can see. One of those facts ages well. The other one is the entire question.

Insider Trackers

285,220 次观看 • 2 个月前

SOMETHING VERY BAD IS HAPPENING SpaceX went public this morning. The biggest IPO in history. $75B raised. Done. The market keeps pretending nothing changed. But the math is now exposed. OpenAI and Anthropic at $2.1T. SpaceX at $1.77T. Combined, nearly $4T sitting in pre-revenue narratives. $450B burned per year across AI. Against $50B in actual revenue. SpaceX itself just reported a $4.2B net loss in Q1 alone. $41.3B accumulated deficit. The entire AI bull case depends on one assumption. Inference gets cheaper. It's not. Memory is getting expensive. Compute is not scaling fast enough. Inference is not falling the way the models predicted. The loop is obvious. OpenAI funds Microsoft. Microsoft funds OpenAI. Nvidia invests in companies that buy Nvidia chips. SpaceX just raised $75B from retail. Insiders sit on $1.6T in paper wealth. Waiting to dump. The signs were everywhere. Everyone calls it growth. I call it the final stage of mania. In 2000, companies added ".com" to the name. Nasdaq collapsed 80%. The dump is now mechanical. July: QQQ rebalance forces selling of everything else. September: lockup #1 expires. Insiders sell into the inflated bid. December: lockup #2 brings a bigger wave. If you've been following me, you already caught the $16K bottom and the $126K top. The next call is coming. And bubbles don't warn you before they break. Follow me and turn notifications on.
0:30

SOMETHING VERY BAD IS HAPPENING SpaceX went public this morning. The biggest IPO in history. $75B raised. Done. The market keeps pretending nothing changed. But the math is now exposed. OpenAI and Anthropic at $2.1T. SpaceX at $1.77T. Combined, nearly $4T sitting in pre-revenue narratives. $450B burned per year across AI. Against $50B in actual revenue. SpaceX itself just reported a $4.2B net loss in Q1 alone. $41.3B accumulated deficit. The entire AI bull case depends on one assumption. Inference gets cheaper. It's not. Memory is getting expensive. Compute is not scaling fast enough. Inference is not falling the way the models predicted. The loop is obvious. OpenAI funds Microsoft. Microsoft funds OpenAI. Nvidia invests in companies that buy Nvidia chips. SpaceX just raised $75B from retail. Insiders sit on $1.6T in paper wealth. Waiting to dump. The signs were everywhere. Everyone calls it growth. I call it the final stage of mania. In 2000, companies added ".com" to the name. Nasdaq collapsed 80%. The dump is now mechanical. July: QQQ rebalance forces selling of everything else. September: lockup #1 expires. Insiders sell into the inflated bid. December: lockup #2 brings a bigger wave. If you've been following me, you already caught the $16K bottom and the $126K top. The next call is coming. And bubbles don't warn you before they break. Follow me and turn notifications on.

Nonzee

67,440 次观看 • 2 个月前

Micron is one of the most UNDERVALUED stocks in the entire AI trade right now and everyone should be buying at these prices. (Save this). Jensen laid out the situation in one sentence, the supply chain is lined up, the HBM is lined up with the Grace Blackwell GPUs, the only problem is that demand is much greater than the overall capacity of the world. And Michael Dell said it before Jensen even finished that memory is the single biggest supply constraint in the entire AI buildout right now. Every HBM chip that Micron, SK Hynix, and Samsung produce consumes three times the silicon wafer area of standard DRAM. Nvidia's Rubin GPU requires 288GB of HBM per chip, a 260% increase over the H100 in just two generations. Every major hyperscaler has locked up contracts through 2026, and Micron has said publicly it can only fulfill about two-thirds of medium-term demand for some customers. And it's HBM production is sold out entirely for 2026 and HBM4 is also already sold out. The numbers tell the story, DDR4 spot prices surged roughly 15x in eight months. DRAM contract prices rose 90-95% in a single quarter, TrendForce called it "essentially unprecedented" in the history of the memory market. Micron has rallied roughly 68% year to date in 2026, and yet it still trades at a P/E of 37.6x against an industry average of 75.3x. The shortage does not resolve until new fabs come online, Micron's new factories are not producing until 2027 and 2028 at the earliest, and the memory shortage is forecast to run until at least 2027. Milk Road Pro has been covering the HBM memory trade as a core AI infrastructure thesis before it became a consensus Wall Street call and our Pro members are already up massively in $MU. Come join us at the link in bio/below to see our full portfolio and the names we're watching before the rest of the market catches on.
1:06

Micron is one of the most UNDERVALUED stocks in the entire AI trade right now and everyone should be buying at these prices. (Save this). Jensen laid out the situation in one sentence, the supply chain is lined up, the HBM is lined up with the Grace Blackwell GPUs, the only problem is that demand is much greater than the overall capacity of the world. And Michael Dell said it before Jensen even finished that memory is the single biggest supply constraint in the entire AI buildout right now. Every HBM chip that Micron, SK Hynix, and Samsung produce consumes three times the silicon wafer area of standard DRAM. Nvidia's Rubin GPU requires 288GB of HBM per chip, a 260% increase over the H100 in just two generations. Every major hyperscaler has locked up contracts through 2026, and Micron has said publicly it can only fulfill about two-thirds of medium-term demand for some customers. And it's HBM production is sold out entirely for 2026 and HBM4 is also already sold out. The numbers tell the story, DDR4 spot prices surged roughly 15x in eight months. DRAM contract prices rose 90-95% in a single quarter, TrendForce called it "essentially unprecedented" in the history of the memory market. Micron has rallied roughly 68% year to date in 2026, and yet it still trades at a P/E of 37.6x against an industry average of 75.3x. The shortage does not resolve until new fabs come online, Micron's new factories are not producing until 2027 and 2028 at the earliest, and the memory shortage is forecast to run until at least 2027. Milk Road Pro has been covering the HBM memory trade as a core AI infrastructure thesis before it became a consensus Wall Street call and our Pro members are already up massively in $MU. Come join us at the link in bio/below to see our full portfolio and the names we're watching before the rest of the market catches on.

Milk Road AI

146,856 次观看 • 3 个月前

🚨THE SPACEX CHART IS MOVING EXACTLY LIKE I SAID $SPCX is now down ~50% from its peak and it's tracing a chart we've all seen before. Pull up Rocket Lab in 2020. Same IPO launch. Same retail pile-in. Same dump right at the top. Lay the two side by side and they're nearly identical. Here's how I read the price from here: $135 → $120 → $140 $140 → $134 → $117 $117 → $85 → $91 $91 → $160 → $250 Down first the flush that shakes out everyone who bought the hype. Fake bounces in between to trap the dip-buyers. Then the real move, once there's nobody left to sell. And here's what makes it dangerous: this entire drop happened before the unlocks fully hit. The float is still about to explode. That's what sets up the final leg down and the entry that actually matters. With the right timing, $SPCX could be one of the best plays of 2026. I'm not buying yet. The moment I make my first buy, I'll post it HERE. You'll see it first. Turn notifications on.
1:11

🚨THE SPACEX CHART IS MOVING EXACTLY LIKE I SAID $SPCX is now down ~50% from its peak and it's tracing a chart we've all seen before. Pull up Rocket Lab in 2020. Same IPO launch. Same retail pile-in. Same dump right at the top. Lay the two side by side and they're nearly identical. Here's how I read the price from here: $135 → $120 → $140 $140 → $134 → $117 $117 → $85 → $91 $91 → $160 → $250 Down first the flush that shakes out everyone who bought the hype. Fake bounces in between to trap the dip-buyers. Then the real move, once there's nobody left to sell. And here's what makes it dangerous: this entire drop happened before the unlocks fully hit. The float is still about to explode. That's what sets up the final leg down and the entry that actually matters. With the right timing, $SPCX could be one of the best plays of 2026. I'm not buying yet. The moment I make my first buy, I'll post it HERE. You'll see it first. Turn notifications on.

Shelpid.WI3M

20,368 次观看 • 25 天前

🚨 BREAKING: TECH COMPANIES ARE STRAIGHT FALSIFICATING EARNINGS Microsoft just gave OpenAI $13 BILLION OpenAI invested it back to Azure Microsoft booked it as revenue OpenAI booked it as a revenue too Amazon and Google are running similar loops with Anthropic while marking up huge paper gains from AI valuations Nvidia and Oracle don't even hide this scheme anymore OpenAI is spending over $60 BILLION a year on compute while generating only $25 BILLION in revenue. Ray Dalio, one of the most profitable investors in the world, has warned that late stage bubbles are driven by fake flows, not real economics He saw it before in 2000, 2008 Now he warns the same ponzi is happening at bigger scale That is exactly the definition of top of the market Keep in mind: I’ve called every major market top and bottom for over 10 YEARS I was one of the only people who called the top in October, and I’ll do it again That’s literally my job If you still haven’t followed me, you’ll regret
0:29

🚨 BREAKING: TECH COMPANIES ARE STRAIGHT FALSIFICATING EARNINGS Microsoft just gave OpenAI $13 BILLION OpenAI invested it back to Azure Microsoft booked it as revenue OpenAI booked it as a revenue too Amazon and Google are running similar loops with Anthropic while marking up huge paper gains from AI valuations Nvidia and Oracle don't even hide this scheme anymore OpenAI is spending over $60 BILLION a year on compute while generating only $25 BILLION in revenue. Ray Dalio, one of the most profitable investors in the world, has warned that late stage bubbles are driven by fake flows, not real economics He saw it before in 2000, 2008 Now he warns the same ponzi is happening at bigger scale That is exactly the definition of top of the market Keep in mind: I’ve called every major market top and bottom for over 10 YEARS I was one of the only people who called the top in October, and I’ll do it again That’s literally my job If you still haven’t followed me, you’ll regret

Hopper

18,271 次观看 • 1 个月前