Peasant_investor

@labubu_trader Some sector rotation and 1–2 weeks of consolidation would be ideal before another leg up. $SOXL is 12x atr from the 50d.

Jukan (@jukan05) wrote a sharp memo on how the US let China's display industry grow unchecked while drawing the line at semiconductors. The strategic analysis is right. But there's a second layer he didn't touch, and it matters more if you actually invest in this space. China's display industry won. Its shareholders lost. And the same pattern is about to replay in memory. BOE controls 25% of the global display panel market. Revenue approaching $29 billion. Net margin: 2.7%. ROE: 3.1%. The stock has gone nowhere for years. Jukan's point is that the US made a mistake by not sanctioning China's display equipment imports the way it sanctioned semiconductor equipment. He's correct. BOE bought the same tools from Applied Materials that Samsung used. No CFIUS review, no Entity List, no restrictions. The result is exactly what he describes. China now holds 70% of global LCD production and just crossed 50% of OLED shipments. Korea is hanging by a thread. But here's what the geopolitical framing misses. Even inside China, the winners of this industrial war weren't the display companies themselves. The value destruction mechanism has four moving parts. First, the capex treadmill. A single Gen 8.6 OLED line costs $4-9 billion. BOE's latest Chengdu fab alone is $8.7 billion. The moment one investment cycle finishes, the next generation demands even more. Profits never accumulate. They get recycled into the next fab before shareholders see a cent. Second, perpetual dilution. Every fab requires massive equity raises, JV structures with state-owned partners, and government co-investment. BOE's share count has expanded enormously over two decades while earnings-per-share growth has been negligible. The pie grows, but each slice keeps getting thinner. Third, the principal-agent problem. BOE's six largest shareholders are SOEs from Beijing, Chongqing, and Hefei. Their KPI is employment, industrial upgrading, and supply chain control. Return on equity was never the objective. When the people running the company don't care about stock returns, the stock doesn't return. Fourth, self-inflicted overcapacity. Four Chinese firms are building Gen 8.6 OLED lines simultaneously. They compete on price against each other, not just against Samsung. Panel prices recover, producers ramp utilization, prices crash again. BOE's gross margin sits at 14%. Even at the top of the cycle, current prices barely keep panel makers above break-even. Market dominance and shareholder value destruction, simultaneously. The industry won. The stocks lost. Now watch CXMT and YMTC. CXMT is pursuing a STAR Market IPO at roughly $42 billion valuation, raising $4.2 billion. YMTC plans to list in H2 2026. CXMT posted cumulative losses exceeding 30 billion yuan across 2022-2024, then reported its first profitable year in 2025, timed perfectly for the IPO window, during the hottest memory supercycle in years. Check the four forces against them. Capex treadmill? CXMT plans to expand from 200,000 to 300,000 wafers per month this year, then to 400,000. The IPO proceeds of $4.2 billion are earmarked almost entirely for fab expansion and R&D. Not a dollar returns to shareholders. YMTC is breaking ground on its third Wuhan fab, targeting production in 2027. Perpetual dilution? CXMT's IPO alone issues 10.62 billion new shares. This is round one. Scaling to 400,000 wafers requires tens of billions more in capital that doesn't exist yet. More raises will follow. Principal-agent misalignment? CXMT was founded by the Hefei government. YMTC is a creation of Tsinghua Unigroup and the National IC Fund. The controlling interest is the state. The mission is memory self-sufficiency, not EPS. Self-inflicted overcapacity? Both are scaling aggressively at the same time. UBS estimates Chinese memory capacity expansion could reach 120,000-140,000 additional wafers per month in 2026, with further increases in 2027. When this capacity hits the market, commodity DRAM and NAND pricing will compress. Samsung and SK Hynix will respond with price cuts in segments where their fabs are fully depreciated. CXMT and YMTC, running brand-new fabs with heavy depreciation, get squeezed hardest. Jukan asks whether the West's semiconductor hegemony will last. That's the right question at the geopolitical level. At the investment level, the question is different. Even if CXMT and YMTC succeed in displacing Samsung and Micron from commodity memory segments, their shareholders will likely suffer the same fate as BOE's. The pattern is structural, not accidental. When the state's objective is industrial displacement and the industry requires perpetual multi-billion-dollar reinvestment, market dominance and shareholder value destruction travel together. So how do you actually profit from this? You don't buy the miners. You sell them pickaxes. Every dollar CXMT raises in its IPO, every dollar of government subsidy flowing to YMTC, a significant portion ends up as revenue for semiconductor equipment suppliers. These companies capture the capex regardless of whether the end customer ever earns a return on its fabs. Three names sit at the center of this flow. Naura Technology is China's largest equipment maker, now ranked sixth globally. Revenue growing 30%+ annually, net margins around 17%, ROE of 17%. That margin profile is six times BOE's. The product portfolio spans etch, PVD, CVD, ALD, furnaces, and cleaning. AMEC is China's etch specialist, founded by a former Applied Materials executive. Revenue expected around 12.4 billion yuan in 2025, up 37%. Etching tools deployed across more than 100 production lines. R&D intensity runs at 30% of revenue, aggressively expanding from etch into thin-film deposition. ACM Research focuses on cleaning and electroplating. Smaller and more specialized, but cleaning is one of the most repeated process steps in memory manufacturing. Dual-listed on STAR Market and Nasdaq. The asymmetry is clean. CXMT and YMTC will spend tens of billions building fabs. Their shareholders will be diluted, margins will compress, and the cycle will punish them. The equipment suppliers earn 17% margins selling the tools that build those fabs, cycle after cycle. One risk. Naura was added to the US Entity List in December 2024. If Washington extends restrictions to Chinese equipment makers more broadly, the thesis gets complicated. And none of these trade cheaply. Naura sits at 52x earnings. But the structural logic holds. In the display industry, the correct trade was never BOE. It was the companies selling BOE the tools to build its fabs. The same logic applies to memory today. Jukan is right that China's display dominance is a cautionary tale for the West. For investors, the cautionary tale is different. The industry succeeds. The value just accrues somewhere else in the chain.

I want to help as many people as possible in a world flooded with fake gurus—and I’m not pointing fingers at anyone. Investing is deeply personal. It demands iron discipline and reliable strategies built on long-term, proven indicators. Most of my followers know that $PLTR is now the largest position across my portfolios—starting with my initial 100,000 shares at $8.80. I’ve done everything I could to urge my genuine friends to keep accumulating when it was dirt cheap. Unfortunately, few listened. But my early patreon subscribers? They’ve ridden the entire volatility wave with me—from $20 to $150. The journey hasn’t been smooth, and I keep repeating: insider selling isn’t a red flag—it’s a green one. It’s the whales who have kept loading up, not us retail investors. We don’t move the needle! Yet influencers with massive followers keep screaming that $PLTR will crash to $10, $45, $100—without ever doing the meticulous research. If they had, they wouldn’t have missed the boat entirely. In a true bull cycle, you don’t need a dozen stocks to win. Simplicity beats overtrading. If real AI leaders like $PLTR aren’t in your portfolio, chances are—you’ve been following the wrong voices. I am showing one of my very small accounts in a local bank in Hong Kong, WITHOUT LEVERAGE or MARGIN, since my average cost at $16.98. It has achieved more than 11.77× over the past 2 years—nothing to be complacent about. Once again, it is a testament to the power of conviction and long-term investment for wealth creation. If a middle-aged man like me can achieve it, I am sure anyone in the world can. It simply depends on whether you are willing to follow good people with reliable indicators. @cantonmeow @PLTRs_Palantir @PalantirTech @cantonmeow @redfoxryder @gabz_investing @starship_ride @tonylee80 @sheslee