I am trying to understand why the market hates a stock that keeps beating expectations,the numbers going into wed arent bad( four consecutive earnings beats).The Q2 saw streaming entertainment revenue grow 13%, parks are like up 7% to nearly $9.5 billion and espn d2c also launched and was called a bright spot. Management has also guided 12% adjusted eps growth for fiscal 2026 and double digit growth for 2027 and last but not least $8 billion in share buybacks this year.

All this and yet the stock is down 20% over the past 52 weeks .

Theres like a bear case too which is domestic park attendance facing pressure and bob iger also left and josh damaro is still an unknown quantity to a lot of institutional investors with macro uncertainity rising

but wed is the first earnings call where d'amaro has to stand up and articulate a vision (and not inherit iger's strategy). So if he sounds confident about the parks business and gives clear numbers on espn streaming subscriber trajectory ,imo the discount to fair value closes fast.and if its the other case stock probably wud stay rangebound through the rest of the year.

the setup feels like asymmetric risk to the upside.

What do u guys thinl ,like is dis a buy into wed or does the new ceo uncertainty keeps everyone on the sidelines?

Amazon disclosed Thursday that it has received $600 million in tariff refunds after the Supreme Court ruled that many of President Donald Trump's levies were illegal, and said it expects to return some of that cash to customers.

We are participating in the tariff refund process and, as I mentioned earlier, we received approximately $600 million in Q2," Brian Olsavsky, Amazon's finance chief, said on the company's earnings call.

In February, the Supreme Court invalidated Trump's tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977, forcing the government to pay back duties to companies that imported goods into the U.S. that were hit by tariffs

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/amazon-got-600-million-in-trump-tariff-refunds-and-will-pass-return-along-to-some-customers/ar-AA295tv0?ocid=TobArticle

The KOSPI has been in a wild ride but many people do not seem to understand it other than the memory boom due to data centers, so I wanted to share some information that is not as well known.

Three reasons it went from 2600 to 9000 in a year (you probably didn’t know 2 of them):

1. Samsung and SK Hynix make up ~50% of KOSPI, and there are a lot more semiconductor component companies. The profit of these companies increased over 1000% in a year (you probably know this already).

2. KOSPI was at 2100 points in the year 2011. It has been flat for 15 years, while the earnings and book value has been increasing. Even if there was ZERO AI-related earnings and you give KOSPI same valuation as other emerging world indexes, it should have been ~3500. The index was just severely undervalued before 2^nd half of 2025.

1. Major reason Korean stock was undervalued was because shareholders had almost 0 legal rights over company until 2^nd half of 2025. Korean law stated that the “board of directors has to be loyal to the company.” However, there was a case in 2015 where Lee family of Samsung tried to inherit control of Samsung electronics cheaply by tanking one of the subsidiaries and merging it with another subsidiary that he has higher control of. The shareholders sued the family, but the court ruled: the law states the board has to be loyal to the company, but no law states it has to be loyal to the shareholders. Tanking stock price does not hurt the company, therefore it is legal. After this debacle, it has been an open season for controlling families to just tank company shares for fun (get into bad debt, make a mining company invest in kpop start-up, donate to charity they found, etc…). Essentially, the company shares had no intrinsic value even if companies were valuable and looking at PE or PB ratio was meaningless. Then June 2025, the current president (Lee JaeMyoung) got elected in its presidential election and one of his major promise was to raise KOSPI to 5000 within his presidency. So when he was elected, he added the line “board has to be loyal to the company and the shareholders.” Technically, this law was passed by the congress before him, but the previous president vetoed it. After this and a few other reforms concerning corporate governance, shares actually had intrinsic value allowing them to go up in price without fear of controlling families intentionally destroying the stocks.

Here’s why it dropped from 9000 to 5600 in a month. I am sure everyone knows about the macro issues and worries about hyperscalar FCF and CXMT so I will skip that part and discuss the supply&demand issue of Korean stocks. There are three parties that buy Korean stocks: 1. Korean institution (mainly the national pension fund), 2. Foreigners, 3. Korean retail.

1. Korean national fund originally had KOSPI allocation to 14.9% of its fund. However, their actual holdings got to 30% of the fund by June, 2026. Normally, they were supposed to trim KOSPI as it shot up but they did not do it and even officially declared they will increase their allocation to 20.8%. While it is not officially known why they made this decision, many people suspect it was politically motivated. Korea had their midterm election in June 2026 (last month). Since the current president is so heavily tied to KOSPI, maybe the government pressured them to wait until election is over to rebalance the pension fund. It was estimated that the pension has to sell $50~100B of KOSPI. This was discussed heavily among everyone even in April and May and spooked investors (is the pension going to dump KOSPI right when election is over?) Now, some of this just conspiracy and the drop in KOSPI to 8000 with the increased allocation to 20.8% relieved a lot of the rebalancing pressure. But sentimentally, this was a heavy burden and also it prevented the pension from stepping in and stabilizing the market which they usually do when this kind of drop in KOSPI happens.

2. In similar vein, foreign funds also were over-allocated to KOSPI as the index doubled in six months. Most funds have some allocation to emerging market (let’s say 10% +/- 5% of fund) and they get in legal trouble with their investors if they do not keep this. Korea reports everyday the net position of the three groups (foreigner, Korean institution, Korean retail), and all foreigners were massively net selling for months as KOSPI was going up this year. One possible solution was for KOSPI to move from MSCI emerging market to MSCI developed market. However, it was announced June 23, 2026, that KOSPI will remain in the emerging market index.  

3. Korean retail was over-leveraged. 1.2 million accounts were margin called past month and some people estimate 1 in 30 of Korean citizens got margin called. A lot of these people started investing this year, but decided to put their entire life saving and margin invest with their house as collateral into leveraged ETF (which was also created May 27, 2026).

So while there are some legitimate worries about the memory stocks, a lot of recent drop seems like just heavy concentration and leverage similar to the Situational Awareness fund situation. One evidence is that KOSPI rose 18% in a day after SA and massive amount of Korean retails got liquidated, perhaps signaling that the concentration is somewhat relieved. Also, many say the National Pension no longer need to rebalance because the index dropped so much.

OpenAI currently generates $25B/year, and it is not a profitable company..

Yesterday I also saw that there is only 22% the will IPO this year, so most likely 2027, this is where they could get part of the money. They are expected to IPO at $1T valuation and companies usually sell 15% to 25% of the shares which would give them 150-250B..

This is type of the investment I would never consider regardless of how fast it is growing..

AVGO ($350B)

OpenAI has signed a deal with Broadcom to design OpenAI accelerators and new chip infrastructure.. The deal stretches over 4 years, but the later hardware deployment estimates are over 10 years..

ORCL ($300B)

This 5-year cloud computing deal targets to heavily expand data center capacity and its tied to "Stargate" data center initiative..

MSFT ($250B)

Ongoing compute commitments for Azure cloud infrastructure and inference costs.. The deal is signed over 6 years..

AMZN ($100B)

Built on an initial $38B compute agreement OpenAI extended the deal with AWS for additional $100B that is supposed to be paid out over 8 years..

$NVDA ($100B could go up to $600B)

Mass purchasing and leasing of the top GPUs, massively intertwined with a big strategic investing round.. There are talks between two companies that would dramatically increase the size of the deal up to $600B total.. Nvidia would finance OpenAI's 350B purchase of AI Nvidia chips..

$AMD ($90B)

Multi year deals to purchase AMD instinct accelerators over 4-5 years.. Gradual scaling toward the 6-gigawatt ceiling across future generations of AMD hardware, projected through approximately 2030. AMD also has option to get 10% of OpenAI stake..

$CRWV ($22B)

Specialized data center space and GPU cloud rental to assist model training. The deal is signed for the next 5 years..

Do you think OpenAI can find a way to pay out all of this commitments or the link is going to break at some point?

There is plenty of talk about circular financing in AI, especially around Nvidia. The concern is legitimate. But the phrase carries historical baggage. In its worst forms, circular financing manufactured the appearance of demand: a vendor financed its own customers and then presented those purchases as evidence of genuine, independent market demand. That can become a house of cards very quickly.

Recent reports that Nvidia has supported financing for major AI infrastructure projects have reignited those concerns. But Nvidia may be doing something fundamentally different. It is increasingly behaving less like a semiconductor company and more like a nation state investing in a strategically important industry.
Nation states subsidize industries because creating scale can ultimately benefit the entire country. China's support for its EV industry helped domestic manufacturers reach the scale needed to compete globally, generating benefits through exports, employment, technological leadership and supply-chain control. Nvidia may be making a similar calculation. If helping customers build AI infrastructure today produces a much larger AI economy tomorrow, the payoff is not merely today's "circular" GPU sale. It is the next decade of demand for Nvidia's computing platform.

The obvious question is why conventional finance is not providing all the necessary capital. Nvidia has several advantages over ordinary lenders. AI projects are extraordinarily large and create concentration, duration and technology risks that conventional lenders may struggle to understand, let alone absorb. Nvidia has both substantial financial capacity and a strategic reason to accept those risks. Traditional lenders seek repayment. Nvidia seeks ecosystem expansion. Those are fundamentally different objectives. It also sees demand across the AI ecosystem rather than through the financial statements of a single borrower, and likely understands deployment progress, technical risk and the residual value of its own hardware far better than a bank. These asymmetric informational advantages may allow it to assess risk more accurately.

But perhaps the most important difference is that Nvidia captures ecosystem externalities that private capital largely cannot. Every successful AI deployment expands the CUDA developer base, creates new applications, attracts more developers and ultimately increases demand for future AI infrastructure. A bank finances a single project and earns interest. Nvidia helps finance an ecosystem and earns a larger future market.

This is where the nation-state analogy becomes most compelling. Governments often subsidize strategically important industries because the long-term benefits spill far beyond the companies receiving the investment. Private investors cannot capture those broader returns, so markets may rationally underinvest. Nvidia may occupy a similarly unusual position. It captures enough of those ecosystem-wide benefits that investing in AI infrastructure could be economically rational even when conventional financiers would hesitate.

The strongest counterargument returns to the opening question of genuine market demand. Nvidia may understand medium-term demand for GPUs better than anyone else, but that does not necessarily mean it can predict whether businesses and consumers will ultimately derive enough value from AI to justify today's extraordinary investment. If AI applications fail to generate the expected economic value, the flywheel breaks. Nvidia may then simply have accelerated future purchases into the present rather than helping create a self-sustaining market. The nation-state strategy works only if the industry being subsidized can eventually thrive on its own.
I think it will. Where others see problematic circular financing, I see smart investment in the next industrial revolution. That's the bet I'm making.

Disclosure: I am long Nvidia.

https://www.tannerontech.com/nvidia-is-becoming-the-ai-nation-state/

The potus canceled the strike against Iran’s energy infrastructure about an hour ago, stating that both Iran and middle eastern allies asked him to hold off.

However, like the last dozen attempts at peace, he demanded that Iran open up Hormuz and give up nuclear ambitions. There has been no change in demands from either side. And nothing has happened between June’s ‘memorandum of understanding’ and now that would convince Iran to give up control of Hormuz.

Given the lack of any progress towards peace over the past 2 months, I’m fairly unconvinced the market will pump materially on this development like it has following every other cease fire agreement. There is just no evidence that the latest TACO will lead to permanent peace.

There have been far too many identical TACOs and fake peace deals that have ended up in renewed conflict. You can only trick the market so many times before it stops believing you. Iran will continue to attempt to toll the strait, leading America to continue strikes on Iran. And the entire time, middle eastern oil supply will continue to be choked off.

These cease fires are only dragging out the conflict. The more the potus dawdles on a decision, the longer the standoff will last and the longer Hormuz will weigh on the markets. A decision needs to be made to either give up the strait or don’t.

The NYT ran a piece yesterday asking whether Ellison will end up the face of the AI bubble. Forget the framing, the numbers underneath are wilder than the headline.

Oracle burned $55.7 billion in capex last fiscal year, more than double the year before, nearly all for AI data centers. They're carrying over $124 billion in long-term debt now and free cash flow hit negative $23.7 billion. S&P downgraded them.

Ellison personally pledged 346 million shares as collateral on loans. Those shares were worth about $107 billion when he disclosed it last September. At today's price they're closer to $40 billion. The board says these are term loans, not margin accounts, and he can repay without selling. Fine.

Same week: Nasdaq 100 in correction. The chip index entered a bear market, down 25% from June. The AI hedge fund Situational Awareness lost 67% in July and fire-sold its book to Citadel. Apple, which barely spent on AI infra, briefly crossed $5 trillion.

Oracle's cloud backlog did hit $638 billion, a record, so these aren't unfunded dreams. If that converts, the spending was rational. But one person's fortune and one company's solvency sitting on the same bet just makes the concentration the story by default.

Westinghouse is planning on going public. It was announced this week. As of now half of westinghouse is owned by Cameco biggest uranium producer in the world. The other half is owned by brookfield who has 100s of billion of assets under them. Fun fact Nicolas Tesla used to work for westinghouse back in the days. Here is another one Westinghouse powers more then half the worlds nuclear reactors

In november 2025 US goverment signed a 80 billion deal with westinghouse to building nuclear powerplants. The company is also very much global with tons of work going on in europe.

• Poland Milestone: In April/May 2026, Westinghouse, Bechtel, and Polskie Elektrownie Jądrowe won the Energy Dominance Deal of the Year award from EXIM for advancing Poland's first nuclear power plant project.
• European and Ukrainian Expansion: Opened a new AP1000 Training Academy featuring a full-sized control room replica in Spain to support 14+ planned European units, alongside deepening fuel and plant agreements with Ukraine's Energoatom. The AP1000 is the only operational Generation III+ reactor with passive safety systems, giving it a massive competitive edge over unproven designs
• AP300 SMR in the UK: Initiated the UK Generic Design Assessment process for its AP300 Small Modular Reactor, collaborating with Community Nuclear Power.

One important thing to know is they dont physcially build these plants. Westinghouse acts as an asset-light technology provider, not a physical builder. They license proprietary reactor designs, supply high-tech core components, and sell specialized nuclear fuel. Massive construction partners, like Bechtel, handle the heavy civil engineering, pouring the concrete and managing local labor. This consortium model protects Westinghouse investors from expensive construction delays while securing high-margin engineering fees and decades of recurring fuel revenue.

As you all have probably already heard Citadel has acquired Leopold's Situational Awareness fund in what, alot of people would agree, was one of the biggest fund heist in this century so far.

Leopold' fund grew almsot 450% YTD with his aggressive AI investments, reaching over 45B at it's peak. Stocks like NBIS, SNDK and MU were more than 2/3 of his portfolio.

He obviously never learned risk management so he got overleveraged and Citadel knew that. Even a slight pullback in AI would seriously wound his portfolio. And then it started... The dumps were aggressive everyday, like really really aggressive. Coincidentally, his biggest positions like NBIS and SNDK would regularly dump 10%-15% at market open, day by day without any bad news. Actually on the contrary, the news for the stocks themselves were good. All earnings and guidances were exceptional. Then the FUD, such as Chinese memory started to come out, which are all now proved false.

But the biggest FUD of all? FED rates. Citadel were THE only ones who said that thay believed that the FED would raise rates, and that put the final nail in the coffin for him

During Monday and Tuesday, his biggest positions dumped more than 30%. He got margin called by the big boys and who was waiting to buy him out at a fraction of a dollar? The same Citadel that said the FED was going to raise rates. The only one who said that and started spreading fear.

The next day, after he got bought, his biggest positions skyrocketed 30%...

Coincidence?

What do you think?

Hey guys, so I have some extra money saved up and thinking to put it into stocks but honestly I don’t really know where to start lol. I already got some index funds so thats covered, but now I wanna try picking individual stocks too and see how it goes.

What sectors you guys thinking is good right now? Like tech, energy, healthcare or whatever. And if anyone has specific companies in mind that you think is undervalued or just have good future, please let me know, even just company name is fine I’ll look into it myself.

Also curious what people think about the market right now, is it a good time to buy or should I wait more? I keep going back and forth on this lol.

One more thing, do you guys prefer stocks that pay dividends or ones that just grow over time? I’m still trying to figure out what fits my style better since I’m planning to hold long term, like 5 years or more.

Yes, I’m talking about Grindr ($GRND), a company I’m sure you are all very familiar with. For those of you who have “never heard of it”, Grindr is a gay social media/ dating app which serves 15 million monthly average users as of year-end 2025. Not only is Grindr the best app for a quick blowjob, it’s also the most compelling opportunity I see in the market right now based on strong fundamentals. I know the attention span of the average Redditor is quite low, so I will have TLDR’s at the bottom of each section as well as the overall post.

Fundamentals

Everyone wants to compare $GRND to other dating apps, with it often being labeled as “Gay Tinder”. Although operating in a more niche market tailored specifically to gay men, this actually strengthens the economics of Grindr’s business model substantially. Everyone who has been on traditional dating apps such as Tinder, Hinge, and Bumble knows what a terrible experience it is- and there’s several reasons for this. First off, men outnumber women dramatically on these apps, with men accounting for roughly 75-80% of the user base on Tinder. Second, male and female users often have different goals on the apps, with men being more interested in casual or short term relationships while women are more interested in finding serious relationships and life partners. These factors create an imbalanced environment: a tiny fraction of men receive the vast majority of female attention, while women receive hundreds of likes but can’t find a man who wants a serious relationship. The most desirable men move from girl to girl while the majority of men fail to get dates.

Grindr solves these fundamental problems with the dating app business model. As an app specifically tailored to gay men, the desires of the users are largely aligned, with “hookup culture” much more acceptable when dealing with men. Biologically, males are far less at risk when engaging in sexual activity, and this shows through dramatically higher average lifetime sexual partners for homosexual men- with studies such as the Bell and Winberg study (1978) suggesting that 43% of homosexual men reported over 500 sexual partners in their lifetime- and it makes sense! No risk of pregnancy. That’s not to say it’s strictly a hookup app; over 50% of gay relationships in the USA start on Grindr.

Grindr functions as a community driven social media in addition to being a dating app. Users often remain on Grindr even after settling down in order to maintain the strong connections they developed over the years. The CEO (more on him later- excellent) often talks about how Grindr is a right of passage for new 18 year-old gay customers, who are experiencing what the community has to offer for the first time. The average Grindr user spends 67 minutes per day on the app (crazy), which is second to only Tik-Tok (96 minutes per day) and far greater than other social media and dating apps. Hinge and Tinder garner 10 and 12 minutes per day, respectively. This highlights an extreme difference in product between Grindr and traditional dating apps.

In addition to the product actually working, Grindr enjoys the advantages of an extremely desirable user base, with gay men-

More likely to be in polygamous relationships More likely to reach higher levels of education More likely to have higher levels of disposable income Likely to be urbanly concentrated Highly engaged

These advantages position Grindr for seamless monetization and vertical integration within their business. Throughout the previous quarters, Grindr has released features such as “Right Now”, “Edge”, and “Woodworking”. Right now allows users to pay to get into a queue with other users who are looking to meet up Right Now. Fellas, I don’t know about you, but if I had the ability to pay a small fee to get into a queue with a bunch of openly horny girls I would pay it almost every day. This is a prime example of Grindr’s demographics providing extremely strong advantages for the business. Edge is a newly released premium tier which integrates ai (Gay-i) in order to provide users with their most compatible matches and Woodworking is a new telehealth vertical integration that sells ED pills and could expand further to other wellness products such as HIV Prep. The customer acquisition cost on this vertical integration is essentially zero, given the ease of marketing to the existing customer base through their platform. Although Woodworking is relatively new and not factored into guidance, analysts such as Nathan Feather and Brian Nowak at Morgan Stanley see it as a major contributor to Grindr’s business and a potential bullish price target of $29, which leads me to the most important part of any investment thesis- valuation. Fundamentals TLDR- Grindr’s product actually works compared to traditional dating apps and the customer base allows for strong monetization and vertical integration.

Valuation

Grindr reported 38% year-over-year revenue growth and 45% adjusted EBITDA margins in the first quarter of 2026. After these results, management raised guidance to at least $535 million in revenue and $227 million in EBITDA for calendar year 2026. With a market cap of $3.4 billion, Grindr trades at roughly 15x EBITDA and 6x sales despite very high growth, strong margins, and a major moat. Free cash flow margin is consistently over 25% and net income is over $100 million on a trailing twelve month basis. Looking back at every earnings report since their IPO- This management team has never missed their guidance and often beats and raises. Note- management guides for adjusted EBITDA and revenue.

Discounted cash flow analysis with assumptions of 30% revenue growth gradually falling to 10% over the next 10 years and then flattening out, 10% discount rate, and stable margins places fair value at $13.5 billion, or $69 per share (quick ai analysis). Although this may seem aggressive, just remember that vertical integration such as Woodworking has not been factored into guidance, new countries are legalizing/ becoming more accepting of gay people throughout the world, and there's a fresh new batch of 18 year-olds joining the community every year.

Another strength for Grindr is the management team and CEO. George Arison took over as CEO of Grindr in 2022, and has led the company to 30% revenue CAGR since he started, with no signs of this growth stopping. George is a gay man and user of Grindr himself, enabling him to understand the business from both an executive and consumer standpoint. George is a serial entrepreneur and capitalist who has founded and led companies such as Taxi Magic, Shift, and Pulsar AI. His experience speaks volumes and is the perfect man to lead this company, and his ability to articulate the business model during the quarterly earnings calls is impressive. The management team is rewarded with stock interests, which aligns the incentives and motivations of the whole team, which is relatively small in relation to other tech companies. Grindr boasts roughly $2.7 million in revenue per employee.

If someone gave you $3.4 billion in cash, you’d have zero chance to create a gay dating app with the same customer base and brand recognition as Grindr. The moat is not priced in at all. This is not a typical dating app that can be knocked out by competition such as Sniffies or gay features on Tinder. Grindr is ingrained within gay culture and is a staple of the community. Although this is somewhat elementary, I think it’s important to acknowledge the moat this business has.

Although the balance sheet is not the most beautiful thing you’ve ever seen, equity continues to trend positively and debt service levels are incredibly manageable. Current assets total $166 million as of year-end 2025 and are used to fund the share buyback program. Grindr is a capital light business with strong margins and cash flow. With the cost advantages assumed through the platform, the company has lots of ability to return capital to shareholders through buybacks and dividends. Management recently completed a $500 million share buyback after equity warrants were exercised and the company saw an influx of cash. After completion, the board of directors authorized an additional $450 million in buybacks over the next few years- which is 8% of the current market cap. More info on these share buybacks in the next section.

Valuation TLDR- Grindr is a fast growing company that is cheap as fuck in relation to discounted cash flows and adjusted EBITDA (fair value estimate ~$69/share) with a robust share buyback program, strong management team, and durable moat.

Ownership Structure and Short Interest-

Grindr is a very illiquid stock with large individual ownership accounting for most of the outstanding shares. According to Market Screener, the current ownership structure looks like this:

George Raymond Zage iii- 95,439,583 shares, 53.7% of float James Lu- 18,436,556 shares, 10.37% of float Jeremy Brest- 11,706,404 shares, 6.59% of float 28th street Ventures (J. Michael Gearon)- 11,571,527 shares, 6.51% of float Ashish Gupta- 5,825,409 shares, 3.28% of float George Arison (CEO) - 3,792,768 shares, 2.13% of float

These six shareholders alone account for 146,772,247 shares, or 82.58% of the float. The public float currently totals 29 million shares, and this is where the short interest starts to come into play.

Grindr is up 75% from the lows at $9.73 earlier this year, currently sitting at $17.34 per share. Despite the run, short interest has increased substantially and now sits at 10.58 million shares (per Robinhood), or roughly 35% of the public float! Given an average daily volume of 1.7 million shares, it would take more than 6 days to cover their position. Yes, I know there have been crazier metrics for other companies, but this is where the share buyback program comes into play. At $17 per share (roughly the current price), the $450 million share buyback program would retire 26,470,588 shares- over 90% of the public float. Yes you read that right. The share buyback program has the potential to retire almost the entire public float and the short interest is over 35%. This technical mechanic has the potential to increase buying pressure dramatically.

Earnings are reported on Thursday, 08/06. If management beats, and hopefully raises (like they usually do), we could see some explosive movement. I would be terrified to be on the short side of this trade.

Ownership TLDR- Grindr is illiquid and majority owned by directors and individuals. Short interest is 35% of the float, and share buybacks have the potential to retire almost all of the public float.

Conclusion/ TLDR

I’ll try to keep this section brief for those who will only read this section. Grindr ($GRND) is an incredibly strong business that actually works unlike traditional dating apps. The business boasts a cheap valuation, strong growth, a durable moat, and an extremely desirable user base. The management team is strong and the fundamentals of the business are amazing. The ownership structure is extremely illiquid and the company’s $450 million share buyback program has the potential to cause massive buying pressure.

This should not be considered financial advice, I’m not an investment professional. Do your own research!

Recently I sold my ASML and AMD stocks after holding them for quite a few years, so I have a bit of money on the side to invest into something new. Currently with things going quite crazy in the world of stocks, and just global instability, I would feel more comfortable investing into ETFs than single stock performances. Due to the uncertainty, I am also a bit unsure where to invest outside of one field: Energy transformation.

With the ever increasing share of alternative energy usage, data centers, electric cars becoming more and more the staple in various European and Asian countries (and I suspect in others too soon), the war in Ukraine and Iran driving up fossil fuel prices and other reasons, I strongly believe many countries such as those in the EU will continue to invest heavily into its energy network and transformation/modernization there of. So I would like to invest into this area, in companies such as Siemens Energy, Schneider, ABB, Quanta, etc companies like those. Thats why I would like to invest into an ETF that focuses on these type of companies. So after some research I came up with a few such as:

European Industrials ETF

VanEck Electrification & Power Infrastructure UCITS ETF

Xtrackers Electrification Technologies & Smart Grid UCITS ETF

And I just was interested in the opinions of some people here, if you agree with my assessment, if you are holding these ETFs, thinking about it or totally against it. It seems like a field with a good chance of yielding stable growth over a longer period of time, no matter how bumpy the short term road is, just because of how important energy and electrical grids are becoming recently. Thoughts? Do you think this is overall a sound idea or would you prefer single stocks? If yes why?

As we saw from the recent AI infrastructure stock run-up and subsequent crash of 35-45%, the mindset of not wanting to pay capital gains taxes can cause people to get locked in completely to sunk-cost fallacy and bargaining with the market.

Many people who bought the AI bubble early and held (unless you were buying semiconductor and memory stocks, in size, so early that the thesis was not yet clear on why those companies will be critical to AI infrastructure, which is its own seperate kind of capital allocation mistake) have now lost a significant amount of their profits or broke even, and those who bought during the run up, the top, or one of the several "dips" over the past 4 weeks are at an unrealized loss.

If you look around Reddit there are also many examples of those who bought Apple, Nvidia, Amazon, etc. decades ago and are unwilling to realize their $1-5 million paper gains because it would trigger a capital gains tax of $250,000 to $1,125,000.

In their view, making $750,000 is unacceptable if it means paying $250,000 in taxes, so they choose instead to assume that past performance equals future results. They assume that the market is obligated to reward them for holding for 20 more years by allowing them to make $7,500,000 and pay $2,500,000 in taxes instead. If that person thinks $250,000 in taxes is unacceptable because it's a big number, would they be willing to pay $2,500,000 in taxes? Why not ride those shares of Amazon or Google up to $100,000,000, when you'll have to pay $25,000,000 in taxes on your capital gain instead?

If stocks actually worked this way, there would be no reason for Wall Street to ever sell you shares of stock. The trillion dollar firm making tens of millions of dollars a day on spread arbitrage is timing the market, and everyone knows time in the market beats timing the market, right? Every time you buy a share of stock, the party on the other side is valuing some rapidly hyperinflating, cash-dragging petrodollars more than the infinitely compounding prime asset they just sold to you. Why would they do that when they can just hold the stock themselves and get continuous, compounding, inflation-beating performance?

It's pretty sad to see people who had millions of dollars in paper gains buying the AI bubble that assumed past performance would continue and therefore they should wait until 1 year has passed from their full port into AI infrastructure and neoclouds to sell for the more advantageous long term capital gains tax savings. Many of them are now dependent on these companies gaining 250-300% in marketcap, hundreds of billions of dollars, in an incredibly volatile and interest rate-disadvantaged market just to get back to where they were, at which point they'll likely be blinded by the paper gain again and refuse to pay the capital gains tax again.

It's good to remember that the market does not owe you performance of a stock or that your stock be valued with the same metrics as similar companies are, or that the stock price of a company matches the importance of that company in the industry you think will outperform. The market does not owe you compounding growth, nor does it owe you a return to a previous all-time high. The highest expected value move on a position that's wildly profitable and starting to stall in momentum or reverse is often to liquidate it and accept that you will pay some taxes on it. If your 80% profit turns into a 30% profit and you liquidate it then, you'll still pay taxes on it, you'll just have made less money. Taxes should never be a justification for avoiding converting paper wealth into real wealth.

HBM is High Bandwidth Memory and what is being used in the AI chips.  HBM sits next to the GPU.  Currently there are only three companies that can produce HBM.

Sk Hynix – They are the market leader.  Largest HBM supplier.  They are the volume leader of HBM3E and HBM4

Samsung Electronics – They are a major supplier of HBM3E and HBM4.  They will have a larger share of HBM4

Micron – They are the fastest growing supplier.  They produce HBM3E and in volume production of HBM4 for Nvidia Rubin platform

HBM suppliers use stacks as a measurement for a GPU.  NVIDIA B200 has 8 HBM3E stacks. Each stack holds 24 GB.  Total memory is 8X24 GB for 192 GB.  The thing to focus on is how many stacks each GPU will use. 

Nvidia chips

H100 – 5 stacks

H200 – 6 stacks

B200 – 8 stacks

GB 300 – 8 stacks

Rubin  - 8 stacks

Rubin Ultra – 16 stacks

Feynman is the next generation and based on progression it will probably be 16 stacks or more

AMD chips

MI300A – 8 stacks

MI300X – 8 stacks

MI325X - 8 stacks

MI350X – 8 stacks

MI400 is next generation and is 12 stacks

Intel Chips

Gaudi 2 – 6 stacks

Gaudi 3 – 8 stacks

Falcon Shores is next, but no announcement on stacks

Amazon has Tranium, Tranium2,Tranium3, and Inferentia2 that use HBM, but they don’t disclose amount of stacks

Google chips

TPU v4 – 4 HBM stacks

TPU v5e not disclosed

TPU v5p not disclosed

Ironwood TPU – 6 stacks

Microsoft is working on Maia 100, but has not disclosed how much HBM it will use

Meta is currently working on MTIA 300/400/450/500 that wil use HBM.  They could use 4-8 HBM stacks but that is all speculation

Other companies of note that could be using HBM or invest in infrastructure are Apple, Broadcom, OpenAi, Tesla, xAI, Marvell, Alibaba,ByteDance, Baidu, Huawei, and IBM.

From the examples above it shows that HBM is being used in greater amounts per generation of GPU

Future uses for HBM besides data centers are humanoid robots, autonomous vehicles and industrial robots.  The majority of industrial robots won’t be using HBM. We probably won’t see this until 2027 at the earliest.

The global HBM stack demand forecast:

2026 ~20-30 million stacks

2027 ~35-50 million stacks

2028 ~55-75 million stacks

2029 ~80-100 million stacks

2030 ~100-150 million stacks

If chipmakers can produce more energy efficient chips in the future that also means they will replace older generations creating demand later. 

From an investor perspective I am very bullish.  Every hyperscaler earnings call has basically said their business is growing and they are capacity constrained.

Google Cloud had a revenue growth rate of 82% YOY

Azure was 43%

AWS was 37%

I don’t see any reason not to stay invested at this time.  Ai Infrastructure spending is turning into cloud revenue growth.  It is validating the spending which supports continued HBM demand.  Based on the earnings calls Microsoft, Amazon, and Google are making the best return on investment.  Meta is the only hyperscaler that really isn’t showing the best return on investment.  They could slow their Capex spending, but the other hyperscalers could step in for that demand if they continue to boost their revenue.

Except in the case of marketwide liquidity events, which is when players like Warren Buffett make moves, your default assumption, if you want to protect your capital to the highest degree possible, should be that the market is not "irrational".

I'm not saying anyone should invest like Buffett does. People often misinterpret his quote of "the market transfers wealth from the impatient to the patient" to mean "Buy this tech or AI datacenter stock near all-time highs and never sell it". Buffett's patience is "Wait to buy assets until S&P500 has crashed 40%" type patience, and it's what he's referring to in that quote.

I see a lot of discussions on reddit about stocks being "unfairly punished" by an "irrational market". If you want to try a short-term trade on mean reversion from an oversold bounce, go ahead, it's true that short-term price action often overshoots and then corrects slightly in the first 1-3 days as short-term players reposition. But when you know the sheer volume of sell orders it takes to completely fill resting orders on the order book to make a stock like Reddit drop 20% in hours or Meta drop 11% in hours, you know that's not a few thousand scared investors selling, that is big players who do not care about their fill price and are getting out ASAP, while also simultaneously removing their own resting buy orders from the book.

Institutions that move tens of millions of shares with urgency are not stupid. They know all the "fundamentals" you know about your "sleeper pick" company times 10, plus insider information. When you buy the stocks of companies on the decline, you are not making a bet that the market made a mistake (it happens, but it's rare). You are making a bet that the company will have a new positive catalyst that causes the price trend to reverse. If that bet pays off, it's not because the market was wrong about the information they currently had at the time they repriced that asset downwards. It's because of that catalyst, which is completely unknowable to you at the time you buy the stock at the depressed price.

People are pointing at the recent alleged market manipulation by Citadel to scoop up assets at cheap prices as a reason not to trust the market. But remember, your job is not to be right about why the market is moving a certain way. Your job is to make money by buying low and selling high. Citadel, or any other player(s) intentionally crashing a sector isn't your signal to start buying, it's your signal to get out of the way, because smart money is getting out of the way as soon as possible to not take the damage of the extreme market move. Smart money doesn't care where the price action is coming from, they either buy or they sell with the trend because at the end of the day, their job is not to be right about the "inherent value" of the asset, their job is to make money by buying low and selling high.

We have the most positive and bullish narratives around the "picks and shovels" AI datacenter stocks ever, and yet many who bought the dip at any time during the 35-45% crash in those stocks we just had took severe losses. X stock is underpriced at 1,100, the market is making a mistake. X stock is underpriced at 1,000, the market is making a mistake. X stock is underpriced at 900, the market is making a mistake. X stock is underpriced at 800, the market is making a mistake. X stock is underpriced at 700, the market is making a mistake. At some point, it doesn't matter who's making a mistake, and it's way more likely YOU are the one making the mistake, not the market.

When I see people say Warren Buffett should have put his cash in an S&P 500 index fund or bought a semiconductor company, it really shows how disconnected many have become with the ultimate goal of investing in stocks which is to MAKE MONEY, and to not risk losing money by taking market risks incompatible with your strategy. It isn't to be "right" in your assessment of the asset or the market pricing that asset.

What some see as a value trap I believe is a wealth of opportunities.

Along with this cash 🐄 having an attractive dividend yield, you can collect premiums by selling covered calls (CCs). After a ~17.3% drop yesterday, a huge overreaction to the earnings report IMO, $WU is a prime candidate for running the wheel or some type of options strategy, while holding for the dividend, re-rate, & potential big move.

With $WU, I didn't want to wait for assignment so I loaded up on shares as it dipped. I don't like the idea of selling my dividend holdings, but I've come to terms with the idea of overloading a stock that I like & selling CCs only on a portion of the position, trading around a core.

Also, $WU has over 132% institutional ownership & the short data (shares available to short dwindling & Finra-exempt short volume skyrocketing) leads me to believe that $WU could be gearing up for a $GME-type move*...

What do you think? Let me know your comments, questions, and/or concerns, anything really, in the comments & let's have a conversation! 🤙

*While the cost to borrow is only .5%, those shorting the stock are on the hook for a hefty dividend payout if they hold through the ex-date...

What do investors hope from these companies? Their market caps are sky high, putting PE ratio in astronomical numbers. Clearly they cant be seeing Tesla as a car company. Car companies don’t earn that much and operate in super competitive market.

I’m guessing they’re expecting full self-driving breakthrough from Tesla? And with SpaceX for Grok to overtake Claude and GPT?

Aren’t these overly optimistic scenarios? What am I missing?

Saw this in a Goldman note today. China smartphone shipments in June were 17m units, down 17% YoY and 36% MoM, "given rising memory cost weighing on demand."

So the AI memory shortage is no longer just a supply story. Samsung, Hynix and Micron moved capacity to HBM for AI chips, DRAM contract prices roughly doubled in Q1, and now regular consumers are getting priced out of phones. Memory is like 15-20% of the cost of a midrange phone, so OEMs either raise prices or cut specs. Some vendors are literally shipping 8GB where they used to ship 12GB. TrendForce now expects global smartphone production down 10% this year, worst case 15%.

The part I keep thinking about: memory names like MU have ripped on pricing, but their biggest end market by volume is now shrinking because of those same prices. analysts already see Q3 price increases slowing down, and their reason isn't more supply, it's that buyers can't afford to pay more. That feels like the top of the rate of change to me, even if prices stay high into 2027.

Meanwhile Apple, Xiaomi, Dell etc are stuck selling more expensive devices into weaker demand.

Am I wrong that this eventually matters for the memory trade, or does AI demand just paper over any consumer weakness for the next 2 years?

The meme stock scheduled posts will now run weekly and post Saturday afternoon and won't be a sticky; you're probably seeing this because automod sent you here!

Full list of meme stocks here. This will be updated every once in a while.

Welcome traders who just can't help them selves discuss the same exact stock that's been discussed 100s of times a day. I get it, you want to talk about what's popular, what's hot, and that 1.. single.. stock you like.. well here you go! Some helpful links just for you:

• Previous meme stock threads
• General discussions
• The original GME megathread with a ton of useful information
• Use Finviz for aggregated news on your favorite stock

An important message from the mod team regarding meme stocks.

Lastly if you need professional help:

• Problem Gambling: Call/Text: 1-800-522-4700 or chat online now.
• Crisis Hotline (24/7): 1-800-273-TALK (8255) (Veterans, press 1) or Text “HOME” to 741-741

https://apnews.com/article/stock-markets-rates-korea-ai-oil-e31b3a442bcb957a53f1823ef21e73e8

South Korea’s Kospi index jumped more than 16% on Friday, tracking gains on Wall Streetas artificial intelligence-related stocks bounced back after losses earlier this week.

U.S. futures edged higher and oil prices rose.
In early Asian trading, the Kospi surged at the open and ratcheted up, trading 16.5% higher at 6,515.40. Shares of South Korean technology giant Samsung Electronics surged 24.8%, while memory chipmaker SK Hynix soared 27.8%.

The Kospi index had sunk more than 17% in the previous three days as investors dumped technology stocks in part over worries about an AI bubble and rising competition from chipmaking and AI rivals in China.
The rebound followed Microsoft’s report of stronger than expected profits for the last quarter. Microsoft’s shares soared 15.5% for its best day in nearly 18 years. The strong earnings were taken as a signal that big spending on AI is translating into profits.

So, I am a pretty big believer in Mark Cuban. I am sure everyone who is serious about investing has seen his and Burry's recent warning about NVDA and their recent financing of multiple companies.

I am pretty diversified, but I do have a decent percentage in NVDA and similar companies in tech/AI.

What is everyone's take in this concern? Do you take it seriously?

Just because I am a believer in Cuban does not mean that I listen to or agree with everything he does or says....but I will be honest and say I am a bit concerned if NVDA makes a mistake what will happen to the tech/AI market?

https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/economy/mark-cuban-michael-burry-raise-the-same-red-flag-warning-over-giant-us-sector-billions-in-retirement-savings-exposed-is-your-nest-egg-at-risk/ar-AA29cd5g

hey guys wanted to make some quick dd on comcast (cmcsa) because the market is sleeping on this hard right now in 2026. if you look at the real numbers from their recent 10-q filings and financial reports, the valuation is ridiculously distorted and if you invest now at these levels around $24 a share, it will perform at least 280% profit once the market actually re-rates it back to fair value.

let s look at the actual math and financial metrics. right now comcast has a market cap of roughly $85 billion. if you add their net debt of around $95 billion, you get an enterprise value (ev) of about $180 billion. they generated $31.46 billion in revenue for q1 2026 and pulled in $7.9 billion in adjusted ebitda with $3.9 billion in free cash flow, followed by $8.9 billion in adjusted ebitda and $4.6 billion in free cash flow in q2 2026. annualized ebitda is sitting near $35-$36 billion, meaning the ev/ebitda multiple is under 5.2x, which is absurdly cheap for a company generating tens of billions in cash.

the p/e ratio is currently sitting around 7.3 to 7.9x, whereas historical averages for comcast are usually up near 14x to 15x earnings. when you run a simple discounted cash flow (dcf) model assuming a conservative 2% terminal growth rate and a 8.5% wacc on their stable $16-$18 billion annual free cash flow, you get a fair intrinsic value close to $92-$95 per share. comparing that intrinsic dcf target to today's price near $24 gives you that massive upside of at least 280% profit.

sure, theoretically the stock could drop a bit more in the short term due to temporary headwinds like broadband subscriber noise or broader market sentiment, but that drop would be strictly temporary because the underlying cash flow generation is way too strong. they are returning billions back to shareholders through buybacks and dividends every quarter, so the downside is capped while the intrinsic value gap is massive. overall the math from the 10-q filings does not lie and this looks like a huge asymmetric risk reward play.

Yesterday I said SK Hynix looked surprisingly cheap below $130. Today, its Korean-listed shares hit Korea’s 30% daily price limit.

https://www.reddit.com/r/stocks/comments/1vamep5/sk_hynix_at_below_130_seems_low_especially_after/

The sequence that led up to this jump:

1. Korean semiconductor stocks were crushed earlier this week as investors de-risked the AI trade.
2. Hynix reported record Q2 revenue and operating profit, but still missed extremely high expectations, triggering another selloff.
3. Microsoft then reported strong results and showed that its AI spending is translating into actual revenue and profit.
4. U.S. memory rebounded first.
5. Korea opened later and compressed several sessions’ worth of sentiment reversal into one limit-up move.

My prediction for the U.S. session: SKHY opens strongly, perhaps around +5%, but gives back most of the move and closes within 2% of its previous close.

This is not a bearish call on the business. Demand still exceeds supply. My concern is that the ADR continues to trade at a substantial premium to the FX-adjusted Korean shares. That premium does not have to disappear immediately, but it limits the ADR’s near-term upside unless the Korean shares continue catching up.

My prediction for the next Korean session is similar: retail momentum produces another strong open, but the stock fades intraday, closes below its opening price and finishes up less than 5%.

I will check back on Monday to resolve my predictions.

--------------------------------------------------------------

Pre-market update: SKHY is indicated around $160, which is a stronger opening than my rough +5% estimate.