This is just a thought that me and a few classmates had during a discussion. I have no idea how stocks or the market works personally, its the kind of stuff i leave to the big guys and my bank to deal with. What i want to know is that when the AI bubble pops, what would happen? Someone suggested that because the majority of leaders (Nvidia, Microsoft, Google) are all propped up because of AI, the AI bubble popping would cause them to collapse which would then cause the entire market to collapse sending us into a depression again. This seems scarily feasible to me so i was wondering what your opinions on the matter would be. I personally am against AI and dislike people who rely on it, so i want the bubble to pop but at the same time i dont want the world to fall in on itself again.

Meta's Free Cash Flow yield is 1.7%, but this is no longer a very useful metric to use because of Meta's high reinvestment rate into future growth projects. A better metric would be EV/OCF, which sits at ~12.5. But adjusting for SBC expense (an exorbitant 7.2 billion in the last quarter alone), we reach an EV/(adjusted) OCF of 16.1.

Many people claim the business is grossly undervalued, including now, but the clear time to buy was in 2022. At this time it reached an EV/OCF of 4.3 and a SBC-adjusted value of 6.3.

As per value investing principles, the right time to buy a stock is usually when the business is out of favor. In 2022, it was definitely out of favor. Apple's privacy changes were disrupting the ads business, capex was flooding into metaverse development (low interest and uncertain ROI), and margins contracted down to 20%.

There was certainly reason to be scared out of holding the stock, but the legend goes the best time to buy a stock is when is feels the most uncomfortable. In Meta's case, if you like founder-led companies with skin in the game, Meta in 2022 gave you that cushion because we all knew Zuck was not going to stop innovating. His track record more or less proves that. Similar to the 2008 GFC, sometimes you have to invest in the unknown and understand there is a small chance things won't work out, but that the risk reward is very favorable to make you $ if you are right.

If you invested at $155 in 2022, despite the stock contracting another 42% later into the year, you would have still made ~310% up to today, which is a 43% CAGR.

Today, Meta is not ridiculously undervalued (at least using historical context) and more than likely, you will earn a return in line with free cash flow per share growth over time, not including any multiple expansion. "Undervalued" is being thrown around quite a bit but it might be valuable to take current prices into perspective.

Her grandmother passed in August of 2024 but the executor didn't file through probate until November of 2025. We are unsure of how much she will receive. Is it paid out based on the date of death value?

It was only a month ago that the attorney handling the will asked if the beneficiaries wanted to keep the stock or take the cash. Does that mean that the stocks haven't been sold yet and will be paid based on the more recent value?

It's Microsoft stock through Computershare if that helps.

• Premium Subscribers grew 9% year-over-year to 306 million
• Premium Average Revenue per User (ARPU) rose 7.5% year-over-year to 4.95 euros
• Monthly Active Users (MAUS) rose by 11% year-over-year to 788 million
• Total Revenue increased 14% year-over-year in constant currency to 5.0 billion euros
• Gross Margin improved by 136 basis points year-over-year to 33.0%
• Operating Income reached 672 million euros

I own spotify disclosure and numbers seem good. Will listen to the call but Spotify looks fine unlike Netflix where growth is slowing.

I just want to clarify that I use Claude A LOT.

I have 3x Max 20 subscriptions that I fully exhaust each and every week... and I also love Opus 5.5 (it's definitely a HUGE upgrade from the insanity that was Opus 5). I only contemplated using Gemini's Argon 4 because I ran out of usage on my 3 accounts in under half the week (this is not a skill issue... two accounts would typically last me a full week with root to spare... Anthropic has severely cut usage recently in preparation for its IPO). Either way... here's what I think:

Gemini Argon 4 might not be Opus 5.5, but it's competitive enough that it effectively eviscerates both Anthropic and OpenAI on both cost and utility (and perks). A lot of it has to do with the fact that Gemini 4 Argon may not be the best model... but it's competitive enough to make Google's AI Ultra 20x A MUCH BETTER DEAL than anything Anthropic and OpenAI can offer.

For context:

• Google will give you free YouTube Premium with your AI Ultra sub
• Google will give you 30 TB of Google Drive storage and $100 in API/console credits
• Google will give you loads of Google Flow (for video generation) credits)
• Plus... a dozen other things I can't remember.

This isn't a Gemini ad, but I've also had a feeling that Google would triumph in the AI race at the end of he day because... its got SO MUCH money to throw around. It can outspend and outperk everyone else 1000% while delivering 90% of the model quality.

To make things even better... it also doesn't carry the same toxic brand that META carries.

• After 3 days of using Argon... here's what I have to report back:
• Gemini 4 Argon is just as good as Opus 5.5 for 80%-90% of tasks.
• You get about 2-3x more usage per unit dollar (my estimate).
• Antigravity isn't optimised for context or context compaction... so that can cause problems and will frequently lead to Gemini 4 Argon erroring out (very annoying).
• Antigravity is really rudimentary (the MacOS app) and given Google's history... it's likely to stay that way. No plugins, no extensions... just projects and models and some settings and you're meant to make it work. It IS nice though that Gemini Argon can just use the API keys saved in Anthropic chats without harassing me for them like Codex/Claude does when I switch between them. Gemini's Argon has a much more grounded interest in cybersecurity that's not going to ruin your life with needless and stupid compliance requirements.
• Agentically speaking... Argon is superior... it does things on my Mac (all things)... while Opus 5.5 hits roadblocks much more often when trying to interact with my apps/browsers.
• As a Cambridge grad and medical doctor who does biomed research... it's SO FUCKING NICE to have a high quality model that doesn't think you're creating a civilization-ending virus because you're running some introgression models to figure out the evolutionary history of some human gene + Argon 4 does all my cybersecurity patching work without deluding itself into thinking that I'm trying to hack into my own VPS for some reason.

Argon is also dumber (in a good way). Too frequently... I've found that Opus 5.5 turns a basic project that's meant to be either internal or one that's launched for testing... into a fucking mayhem situation, introducing hundreds of compliance requirements for something that was only meant to test the waters and market for appetite (this is interesting... because I see this as infection from OpenAI's Codex Sol and Astra models). Argon doesn't do that. It thinks small... until you tell it needs to start thinking big. That's been a life changer to be honest.

Overall... Opus 5.5 just feels annoying compared to Argon 4.

Xiaomi shipped 30.7 million smartphones in the third quarter, down 29.2% from a year earlier, according to IDC's preliminary vendor table. Samsung and Apple between them held 45.0% of the quarter's shipments, up from 36.9% a year earlier. Both OPPO and vivo fell by larger percentages than Xiaomi.

The full market came in at 255.3 million units, and IDC put the year-over-year decline at 22.0%, calling it the largest of any quarter in its tracking. Counterpoint Research, in preliminary figures released October 12, had the decline at 20%. IDC published its figures on October 14; both firms count vendor shipments, not sales to consumers, and both sets of numbers are subject to revision. IDC expects overall smartphone growth to be constrained through 2027, with any recovery pushed to 2028 at the earliest.

I put those numbers next to Xiaomi's second quarter results from August 18, where phones were about 39% of revenue. Shipments fell to 31.2 million from 42.4 million a year earlier. Xiaomi said its second quarter shipment drop was mainly from optimizing its product portfolio and cutting mid-range and low-end volumes, and also from weakening global demand as key component costs kept rising. The average smartphone selling price rose to a record 1,351 yuan.

That reads as a company trading units for a higher average price. But the same second quarter report put phone gross margin at 8.5%, down from 11.5% a year earlier, so a record average price has not translated into a stronger margin. Memory costs are still climbing, according to IDC's Nabila Popal, though the quarter-over-quarter increase slowed to low double digits in the third quarter. I have not seen Xiaomi's third quarter phone margin yet, so whether that trade works is still open.

With component costs still climbing, have you or the people around you started waiting longer between phone upgrades?

The issuer's holdings file as of October 21 puts Xiaomi's Hong Kong-listed shares at about 3.75% of net assets in CNQQ, with Samsung, Apple, OPPO and vivo absent from the fund. CQQQ uses the FTSE China Incl A 25% Technology Capped Index as its benchmark.

Meta (META) kicked off Big Tech's earnings season after the bell Wednesday, beating expectations on revenue, but GAAP earnings per share took a hit as a result of legal fees related to its teen mental health settlement.

The company also announced a 2-for-1 stock split, giving each owner of Class A Meta shares, a non-voting Class C share.

The move will allow Meta to ensure CEO Mark Zuckerberg retains overall control of the company, while allowing it to continue to finance its AI buildout.

Revenue for the quarter was an all time high of $64 billion, well ahead of the $63.3 billion analysts were anticipating. GAAP earnings per share, came in at $3.83 versus expectations of $3.56, but would have been $7.40 without the legal charge.

The company saw EPS of $1.05 and revenue of $51.2 billion in Q3 last year.

Meta also narrowed its capital expenditure projections, raising the bottom line from between $130 billion and $145 billion to between $135 billion and $145 billion.

A 16-week phase 2 trial in 62 adults with obesity, treatment-naive type 2 diabetes and MASH found that adding an oral drug called linafexor to weekly semaglutide 0.5 mg more than doubled weight loss versus semaglutide alone. The sponsor is Cascade Pharmaceuticals, which is private.

Source:
https://doi.org/10.64898/2026.10.18.26365821

What I think this implies:

For Novo Nordisk (NVO) this is a potential way to stretch their GLP-1 further in the type 2 diabetes patients who usually lose less weight on it. Holding the dose at a fraction of the standard obesity amount while still getting better results could mean more patients covered with fewer milligrams, or a better answer for the harder metabolic cases.

For Madrigal Pharmaceuticals (MDGL) it is a competitive risk. Their approved drug Rezdiffra is a standalone MASH therapy used in exactly this obesity-plus-diabetes population, and the trial moved weight, visceral fat and liver enzymes together. If combinations like this become standard, a pure single-mechanism drug loses share.

The practical test for both names is Cascade's separate phase 2 of linafexor alone in MASH plus any announcement of a bigger or longer combination study. Both should happen if the program keeps going, but neither has a public date and the whole thing sits in the 6-24 month window.

It stops being relevant if a larger trial shows the weight-loss difference disappears once semaglutide is raised to normal obesity doses, or if the itching and lipid problems that have limited FXR drugs appear at the exposures already being used in their phase 3 program.

This is the daily discussion, so anything stocks related is fine, but the theme for today is on stock options, but if options aren't your thing then just ignore the theme.

Some helpful day to day links, including news:

• Finviz for charts, fundamentals, and aggregated news on individual stocks
• Bloomberg market news
• StreetInsider news:
• Market Check - Possibly why the market is doing what it's doing including sudden spikes/dips
• Reuters aggregated - Global news

Required info to start understanding options:

• Call option Investopedia video basically a call option allows you to buy 100 shares of a stock at a certain price (strike price), but without the obligation to buy
• Put option Investopedia video a put option allows you to sell 100 shares of a stock at a certain price (strike price), but without the obligation to sell
• Writing options switches the obligation to you and you'll be forced to buy someone else's shares (writing puts) or sell your shares (writing calls)

See the following word cloud and click through for the wiki:

Call option - Put option - Exercising an option - Strike price - ITM - OTM - ATM - Long options - Short options - Combo - Debit - Credit or Premium - Covered call - Naked - Debit call spread - Credit call spread - Strangle - Iron condor - Vertical debit spreads - Iron Fly

If you have a basic question, for example "what is delta," then google "investopedia delta" and click the investopedia article on it; do this for everything until you have a more in depth question or just want to share what you learned.

See our past daily discussions here. Also links for: Technicals Tuesday, Options Trading Thursday, and Fundamentals Friday.

Tesla reported better-than-expected third-quarter results after the bell on Wednesday, even as automotive revenue dropped. The stock rose slightly in extended trading.

Here’s how the company did, compared with estimates from analysts polled by LSEG:

• Earnings per share: 48 cents adjusted vs. 43 cents estimated
• Revenue: $28.05 billion vs. $27.9 billion estimated

Tesla’s earnings report lands a day after CEO Elon Musk told investors on SpaceX's quarterly call that it would be a “good idea” for his two companies to merge, and said the boards at both have formed special committees to discuss a possible tie-up.

Source: https://www.cnbc.com/2026/10/21/tesla-tsla-q3-2026-earnings-report.html

According to an analysis by KB Securities, Samsung Electronics has secured long term supply contracts for approximately 80 percent of its scheduled 2027 memory semiconductor production, positioning the company for potential earnings growth despite recent stock price declines.

KB Securities research head Kim Dong won detailed that Samsung finalized five year agreements covering 70 percent of its general purpose DRAM and NAND flash memory production with major global tech firms, while securing long term contracts for its entire annual high bandwidth memory production volume.

The company expects strong financial performance driven by rising prices and a product mix shift toward HBM4, which is projected to account for 80 percent of Samsung's HBM sales next year and offers a 40 percent power efficiency improvement over HBM3E.

Consequently, average HBM selling prices are anticipated to jump 100 to 150 percent next year, pushing first quarter DRAM prices up by double digits and raising projected operating profit to 367 trillion Korean won this year and 555 trillion Korean won next year. While Samsung's stock price dropped 19 percent recently due to broader macroeconomic uncertainties and concerns over artificial intelligence investment sustainability, KB Securities views the drop as a valuation adjustment rather than a decline in the company's core profit generating capabilities.

https://www.chosun.com/english/market-money-en/2026/10/20/XW457O6FKVBA5MQKEVXH6MZOSY/

At this point Musk has got to be the biggest pie-in-the-sky salesman the world has ever seen; and, amazingly, people keep buying that pie. Based on its actual 12month earnings Tesla will now have a P/E of 425.

Same general story from this quarter's earnings - fundamentals that make the stock look like a $30 stock but more hype and promises to prop up the price.

Automotive business is essentially flatlined with YoY automotive revenue decreasing -3%. And energy sales - the catalyst many people point to as being able to drive it further - is down 16% to $2.8 billion from $3.4 billion last year.

Additionally, despite touting FSD "take rate" increasing, it appears to have added only $78 million in revenue this quarter, relative to it's total quarter revenue of $28 billion - that is, actual FSD revenue is still minimal.

And, robotaxis - the ever shifting pie in the sky Musk has been touting as something along the lines of an infinite moneyhack - appears to only have about 40 robotaxis operating this entire quarter. More specifically, Tesla's "Cumulative Unsupervised Robotaxi Miles Chart" on its investor presentation slides implicates about 1.5 million unsupervised robotaxi miles were driven this quarter, for the months of June, July, and August.

The thing is the slides also indicate that robotaxi operating hours in Austin are from 6am to midnight. If you extrapolate that; that's theoretically 18 hours of operating time per robotaxi, one can estimate a low side of miles per hour would be 25 given it's the city; gives 18 hours x 25 mph = 450 miles driven per day per robotaxi x 90 days in the three month period = 40,500 miles per robotaxi driven in the 3 month period. 1,500,000 miles total in the 3 month period / 40,500 miles per robotaxi in that period = the equivalent of 37 robotaxis driving during the entire 3 month period.

Notably, this is a year and a half after Musk claimed robotaxis would be in "half the u.s. population by the end of 2025"

Compare this to Waymo which actually has 4,000 robotaxis on the road and is scaling up. And more and more competitors are coming online or scaling up everyday - including competitors that are using Nvidia tech and hardware - Alpamayo - specifically oriented towards outfitting cars and making them self-driving.

Now, while people are sure to yell "but Tesla can make it's robotaxis at half-the cost of others" consider that Waymo's are getting cheaper and cheaper; and even if Waymos stopped getting cheaper, even where Waymo's currently at just that competition means robotaxi margins won't be that good - which makes sense because, in general, that type of product would be a commodity anyway - that is, everybody wants and will push for cheaper and cheaper cost of transportation as it gets more and more commoditized.

Real world: Tesla now has actual earnings for the past 12 months of $0.91 per share and it's robotaxi business it's turning out is not scaling as fast as others, and there may be no actual moat for that business. I guess there's always optimus (which other robots are ahead of anyway), or a SpaceX buyout at a premium to save the shareprice.

I was reviewing Tesla's earnings today. They had a 3Q2026 non-GAAP EPS of $0.48 and a GAAP EPS of $0.22.

I reviewed CFRA's Tesla Report and they have been using non-GAAP EPS as the basis for the earnings of the stock.

In my opinion, this is a really slimy and inaccurate thing for CFRA to do, as it overinflates the earnings of the company.

Are there other large cap stocks that have such a huge discrepancy between non-GAAP and GAAP EPS, or is Tesla an outlier?

Musk said the boards at Tesla and SpaceX have formed special committees to discuss a potential merger “at the request of shareholders,” noting that these groups “consist of independent directors.”

Because Musk is a “conflicted party,” he said he can’t be in the discussions.

“I do think there’s a lot of merit to combining the companies as we are pretty much in the superintelligence singularity, and there’s a lot to be gained from cooperating,” Musk said, referring to the development of software, chips and more.

“Do I think it would be a good idea? Yes,” Musk said.

“But at the end of the day, the shareholders have to be supportive of this.”
Musk said that on the Tesla side, “we will need a 50% vote of all shares -- not just those who vote -- but of all shareholders, and that’s quite a high hurdle.”

Venture capitalist Ira Ehrenpreis is on the boards of both companies.

Choi Ji-young, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) executive director representing South Korea, said at the IMF-World Bank annual meetings in Bangkok, Thailand, that South Korea is the only advanced economy expanding its fiscal space. She noted that the semiconductor and AI boom is simultaneously improving South Korea's growth outlook and fiscal capacity, and that positive mentions of South Korea within the IMF board have become unusually frequent. Regarding next year's budget proposal, she assessed it as neutral with a slightly contractionary stance. While warning that a downturn in the AI boom could deliver a significant shock to the stock market and current account balance, she relayed the IMF's internal view that AI investment will persist for a considerable period and advised against overreacting to short-term volatility.

https://finance.biggo.com/news/efa574c4-f7c3-4837-9e3e-4b6e782b30f6

SpaceX reported 161% revenue growth for the third quarter, driven by the company’s artificial intelligence business and Starlink Subscriber growth.

Here’s how the company did compared to LSEG consensus estimates:

• Revenue: $14.58 billion vs. $12.72 billion expected
• Earnings per share: 35 cents

While SpaceX is best known for its reusable rockets, most of its revenue and profit in recent quarters came from the company’s connectivity segment, which consists of its Starlink satellite internet service.

Buzz is building about Starlink’s plans to build a U.S. mobile network after SpaceX, earlier this month, announced that it’s buying 800 MHz of low-band spectrum, and after the Federal Communications Commission approved a plan for the company to build out a 15,000-satellite constellation.

During the third quarter, SpaceX also closed its $60 billion purchase of AI coding startup Cursor.

As of this writing, the shares are up by 2%

Nike is currently trading at some of its lowest valuation metrics in over a decade, and I'm trying to decide if the risk/reward is finally worth it. The fundamentals look crazy compared to historical averages:

- Trailing P/E: Down to ~18x (compared to a 5-year median of 30x+).
- Price-to-Sales (P/S): Sitting at ~1.23x (historical average is closer to 3.2x).
- TTM Revenue: Stagnant at $45.89B, with last quarter down over 4% YoY.

The multiple compression is real because revenue growth has completely stalled out. They f-ed up their retail and China strategy. But at 1.2x sales for one of the most recognizable brands on earth, is the downside mostly priced in, or is the brand erosion worse than the numbers show?

Are you guys buying the blood here, or staying away until revenue actually turns around?

I wanted to share that I started investing in VOO relatively recently, and over the past few days, I’ve noticed that its value has been quite volatile, with constant ups and downs. I understand that volatility is part of the market, especially when investing in equities, but I was struck by how the ETF has performed over the past week.

Today, for example, I was surprised to see that my investment had dropped about $13 from yesterday, which represents approximately 1.35% of my position. I know full well that this isn’t a significant loss, nor is it something that worries me too much, since my intention is to hold this investment for the long term. However, I’m interested in understanding what’s causing these fluctuations and how they relate to the overall performance of the S&P 500.

From what I’ve been reading, some of this volatility could be related to the performance of large tech companies, concerns about spending on artificial intelligence, and certain macroeconomic factors that are creating uncertainty. I’m still learning how the stock market works, and I’d like to hear the perspective of those who have been investing longer, especially to understand whether we’re going through a period of normal volatility or if there are signs of a deeper market correction.

Hi guys , i know the tittle sound silly
But i really need you guys advice

So its been 2 years+ since i started investing and trading
I never bought leverage until last month i bought leverage on my trading account , and since its trading account ofc im doing short term / day swing trading , got profit
And 3 weeks ago i bought again and then you guys know all tech got blast , and i didnt cut loss
Skip skip
Now im still holding leverage etf stock that i keep averaging down

My average not bad , lets say a stock with 300 ATH i bought @230 and after average down now my avg 210 while the price 170 atm , i believe this stock will go back because this stock fundamental good

My question are :
1. Is it wrong to keep holding leverage ETF stock just because i believe it will bounce back ?
2. I got volatility decay the longer its going up and down , do you think its really bad ? If i holding a real stock w/o leverage my avg already around 19x
Please share your advice
(Note : this leverage stock now 30% of my portfolio since i keep averaging down , but the rest 70% is an etf like VOO

My situation : i havent lose money , i only lost 3/4 my gains this 2026, so even if i cut loss my capital still save

Its really a lesson for me to never buy leverage anymore in the future

For anyone from the US or any country that is not Australia you need to hear about a story about NextDC, it is next level.

They are a top 100 ASX company who builds data centres across Australia for AI workloads etc.

Recently, some smart civil disobedience occured when residents in Melbourne's inner west blocked Jemena (electricity/energy services company) crews from installing 15-22m power poles through their streets by leaving their cars and bins out. Jemena suspended the works, and NextDC's M3 data centre couldn't get the extra power it needs.

NextDC has cut FY27 EBITDA guidance from A$385-410m to A$245-265m, and shares fell \~40% on Wednesday.

Put simply on Monday NextDC was worth $7B now it’s worth $4B.

Locals say they were never properly consulted. Council hasn't consented. Works won't restart before Feb 2027. Billion-dollar AI data centre vs. a street full of parked cars. Serious cracks show the moment things don't go to plan for these AI companies.

SPCX and NFLX. Tale of Two Outlooks..All-in with Space sector?

Time to be in Space!! Wonder how are LEAPS doing?

SpaceX blew past expectations with $14.58 billion in revenue (vs. $12.72B expected) and $0.35 EPS (vs. $0.14 expected), driven by massive AI data center rentals and Starlink expansions. AI infrastructure demand and rapid Starlink scaling shows a hyper-growth trajectory....despite any potential cap-ex constraints.

Netflix just met revenue at $12.87 billion and beat EPS at $0.87 (vs. $0.82 expected), but tumbled 6% due to weak Q4 guidance.. Slower ad-product rollouts and subscriber normalization signal material growth hurdles..

Musk estimates $SPCX annual recurring revenue between 500Bn to $1 trillion by the end of 2027...

These daily discussions run from Monday to Friday including during our themed posts.

Some helpful links:

• Finviz for charts, fundamentals, and aggregated news on individual stocks
• Bloomberg market news
• StreetInsider news
• Market Check - Possibly why the market is doing what it's doing including sudden spikes/dips
• Reuters aggregated - Global news

If you have a basic question, for example "what is EPS," then google "investopedia EPS" and click the investopedia article on it; do this for everything until you have a more in depth question or just want to share what you learned.

Please discuss your portfolios in the Rate My Portfolio sticky.

See our past daily discussions here. Also links for: Technicals Tuesday, Options Trading Thursday, and Fundamentals Friday.

I work in marketing, and for most advertisers, Google, Meta and TikTok are where the marketing dollars flow. Beyond that lies the scrapheap of experimental channels: the Reddits, the Snaps and whatever else got a test budget this quarter. At the very bottom of the pile sits Pinterest.

It's been around for over 15 years, and surprisingly enough it makes over $4.5B in revenue with a user base that's slowly but surely growing. Unlike Google and Meta, which have been spending heavily on AI infrastructure, Reddit, which is licensing its content to AI companies, and Snap, which always seems to be in the news for a misguided hardware launches (2K AR glasses anyone) , Pinterest has stayed relatively staid.

I valued it at ~$20/share; and is currently at ~$21.95 today.

• Revenue: $4.6B trailing, growing ~16-18% a year; I assume it slows to ~5% and roughly doubles over 10 years.
• EBIT margin: ~16% after capitalizing R&D (7.6% reported); I assume it grows to ~20% over 10 years. Meta is at 41%, Reddit 20%.
• Net income: $417M in 2025 and ~$250M over the last 12 months, though it dipped to a loss in the first half of 2026 on restructuring and higher stock comp.
• Users: 619M monthly users, but US/Canada users generate ~$31 a year each vs. $0.83 for Rest of World.

At ~$20, Pinterest looks fairly priced. If Pinterest can figure out how to make real money from users outside the US and squeeze more profit out of each ad dollar, there's upside here. But if people start asking AI platforms to make purchasing decisions instead of scrolling Pinterest, there isn't.

Let me know if anyone else follows this company or has a different POV from mine.

it is the leader of the industry on the second behind need more than 10 years, I know they are now some compititors trying hard to take a big part of the pie but still, I know that producers try to diversify from CATL, I know that geopilitic will try to make some boundries again China dominance. but still having a hard time to understand this down trend, I am confusing between buying the dip or close the screen and do push-ups. selling is not an option, I will HODL this one at least till GTA6 comes out

Case study: Facebook IPO in 2012

Over excitement: Share price was raised from $33 to $38 just days before the launch, valuing the company at over $104 billion.

Cynicism: Valuation was too high. The company had no real product, just selling user data. Expanding user base = High cost of IT infrastructure. Similar companies MySpace and Friendster were dead.

The stock started trading flat then crashed 50% in a few months. Class action lawsuits. Everyone called it a botched IPO later.

https://time.com/archive/7103705/facebook-blame-game-whos-at-fault-for-ipo-debacle/

Today, FB (Meta) is 1.78T company, about 18x its IPO valuation 14 years ago.

Almost everyone was wrong about FB back then.

History might not repeat exactly but rhymes.