Jason's Chips

It's really quite underrated. The worse something looks optically, the higher the c o n v e x i t y And bc AI lets numbers get revised up 150% in a week something that's unprofitable could be trading at like 2x realized earnings It's why I might be the sole $CRWV bull out there. Using options on it too. Leverage cubed.

Right now, the cheapest value stocks are: > Samsung > SK Hynix > Kioxia > Micron > SanDisk Right now, the highest growth stocks are: > Samsung > SK Hynix > Kioxia > Micron > SanDisk Don’t overthink this. Be smart and do this:

The fastest way to turn into a NPC is to fill every moment of stillness with audio books, podcasts, CEO interviews, tweets, threads, and YouTube videos. The fastest way to turn into the Main Character is to spend more time in stillness and give yourself 4 hours to create.

UBS downgrades $SOI Soitec to Sell (PT €85) on valuation even though they actually became more bullish on Soitec’s photonics opportunity…after missing the entire run with a neutral rating. Their argument is that investors have become so excited about silicon photonics and AI optical interconnects that they’re overlooking the rest of the business. UBS now models Soitec’s Photonics-SOI business growing from roughly $ 100M today to a around $ 400-500M wafers opportunity by FY30. But the problem is valuation. Even with photonics growing ~36% annually, UBS thinks the market is extrapolating that growth too aggressively across the entire company. The other ~80%+ of revenue still faces slower growth, inventory headwinds, RF-SOI maturity, and margin recovery challenges. The takeaway: (++) UBS remains constructive on the long-term photonics story (++) Silicon photonics could become ~25% of revenue by FY28 (-) Revenue growth at Soitec may lag the growth seen by downstream photonics customers (-) Most of the business is still not photonics (–) UBS believes the stock already discounts an overly optimistic growth path

Morgan Stanley: “Optical Content Growing. Regardless of Architecture.” Morgan Stanley’s latest optical report pushes back on the idea that the CPO vs. NPO debate changes the broader demand trajectory for optical content. The core argument is that investors may be over-indexing on architecture timing, while the more important variable remains bandwidth growth. Whether the market ultimately scales through pluggable optics, NPO, CPO, OBO, or hybrid architectures, the need for higher bandwidth should continue to drive more optical engines, lasers, and related content per GPU/rack. The report acknowledges that CPO adoption has meaningful timing and execution uncertainty. Packaging complexity, lower yields, troubleshooting difficulty, ecosystem immaturity, and customer reluctance around serviceability all remain real constraints. That is why Morgan Stanley frames the current debate less as a question of whether optics wins and more as a question of when and through which architecture the industry scales. Importantly, the report still points to optical content rising materially as AI networks move from current architectures toward copper/CPO hybrid and eventually fuller CPO configurations. Morgan Stanley estimates optical engines per GPU increase substantially across each step of that architecture transition, with the demand driver tied less to a specific design choice and more to the underlying bandwidth requirement. The market reaction in optical names appears to reflect concern that slower CPO timing could delay the upside case. Morgan Stanley’s framing is more balanced: conservative assumptions on CPO timing may keep stocks away from the most aggressive bull cases for now, but the underlying content expansion remains intact. For $LITE, $COHR and $GLW, the debate is not whether AI infrastructure requires more optics, but how quickly that demand converts into revenue as architectures evolve.