oops

@ASTS_SpaceMob The nonstop pumping is so cringe and childish

$ASTS - CHANGING WIRELESS CONNECTIVITY FOREVER

@HeyGen You guys really dropped the ball

We turned our mascot Orby into a Codex pet Building a HyperFrames project in Codex? No one better to keep you company

@ASTS_SpaceMob Spacemob is losing aura with every post like this. From a newfound acquisition rumor to this nonsense comparison. They just need to put functional satellites in orbit at scale, that’s all. The rest is hopium nonsense.

If SpaceX is ever valued at $7.5T, I can’t even begin to think what $ASTS is capable of hitting

@oliviatrading_6 lol

$ASTS Not only GOOG earnings call tonight but also META, MSFT and AMZN. It will be interesting to see if META mentions potential partnership with us having visited our facilities.

@dreamingtulpa What video model is this? So good

hellooo

@moondreamai @vikhyatk Didn’t know gpt 5.4 can do boxing so well

Launching Lens, our fine-tuning service for Moondream. Improve Moondream's accuray to production-ready levels in hours, with as few as 20 images. Example: we taught Moondream to find the player with the ball in NBA footage. F1 jumped from 28% to 79%, beating ChatGPT. 54 minutes, $16.89. Fine-tune your own: moondream.ai/blog/lens-moon…

@PK_Fund The stock drops up to %10 on random days with no news, if anything it’s under reacting

$ASTS Market is totally over-reacting again. The orbit alignment error had nothing to do with AST Space mobile. People react without understanding the total situation. 1. New Glenn rocket failed not AST sat. 2. AST has insurance for these cases. 3. One of hundreds of sats in the planned constellation means nothing. For the reference: Hundreds of Starlink satellites have failed after launch, due to orbital decay, malfunction, or solar‑activity‑related issues. So this is normal in the satellite business but some people just don't seem to understand it.

@ashleybezamat That’s arguably a bad strategy in highly competitive markets. Make it exist first then make it better. The launch and production costs drop over time, you can replace/upgrade satellites a year from now with better tech more reliable launchers. They will lose their time advantage

@realSeanS @AbelAvellan @Yield_of_Parth “Space is hard” is not properly priced in and you’ll feel that tomorrow

@AbelAvellan @Yield_of_Parth Wild all the people rooting against and hoping for a company to fail. Can they hit 45 satellites by EOY? Arguably they can, they now have four shifts working around the clock. The composite structures are starting to arrive. The stacking problem looks solved. Space is hard.

The first stage was nominal, and the booster came back beautifully. We separated and turned on as expected, but the launch vehicle second stage did not place BlueBird 7 on its intended orbit. We are on Satellite 32 and plan to ship BB8 to 10 in approximately 30 days and continue to target ~ 45 satellites in orbit this year.

@techinvestoor 0 in 6 months but somehow 89 in 18 months sounds delusional

$ASTS If we end next year with 89 satellites instead of 90 will you regret panicking?

@AlexfromBabylon It’s very likely the next launch will happen in the second half of the year. That’s 0 satellites in LEO in 6 months. Now they have to deliver 45 in 6 months. Launch failure is not even the main issue. If you can’t adjust your thesis as new info comes in, you’re not rational.

$ASTS Management made a very strategic decisision to flush the balance sheet with cash. We already have a MLA with SpaceX for probably more then 5 launches and double booked a lot of launch. After today I might imagine Scott is going to hand over another bag of money to SpaceX to procure more F9. Most people don’t understand that even if launch cost double or triple each satellite is still widely profitable.

@deepvaluedude @DeepValueBagger It’s only <5% if you use spacex falcons tho

$ASTS Your entire stance on a company hinges on third party launch providers failing <5% of the time, all the while the company insures every satellite that goes up? This isn’t a reasonable take whatsoever. If that was the case, every space company that relies on a third party launch provider should avoid continuing operations. Launch provides the means to get to orbit, but as an investor the business economics rarely support mega valuations unless you are Elon. AST has a business, at scale that supports ~$50B valuation at the minimum, if not pushing traditional MNO valuations because of the business model. Lastly, if anyone thinks Blue Origin did this on purpose or doesn’t care, they’re wrong. Every “failed” launch/deployment hurts their reputation, and if the company wants to compete with SpaceX, they’re going to have to raise a lot of $. The only way they can do that is if they have customers and show a path towards having economies of scale. I wouldn’t bet on another “failed” launch. Which means whatever valuation AST settles at after the panic is done, the comps against SpaceX and Amazon D2C look incredibly cheap (especially since the tech is comparable, if not ahead).

One of the moment I got bearish on $asts when i found out that they were going to launch with India space program. I dont know what happened to it but you'd think blue origin would do better. These are the risks... It's a matter of time.

@AlexfromBabylon Well the factory produces one satellite per year so…

$ASTS Most people don’t understand that the factory is the real product. A satellite loss sucks (still TBD), but keep in mind this is just one satellite output from a factory that is about to churn out dozen. The investments and production ramping are already done and in full swing. Good to keep the perspective.

@MetalFrogStonk Yea approximately could be anything that’s the beauty of it

@Defiantclient2 @builtbyaftee @retail_mourinho Even if a single satellite doesn’t matter (we only have 5 up there as we speak, btw), why would you risk it? Let them show some track record first. If SpaceX was not viable at all, I would have understood, but this just seems lousy and unnecessary.

@Joonzzy @builtbyaftee @retail_mourinho SpaceX launches are for the batches BONG NG3 launching a single satellite doesn’t matter too much when they already have BB6. Single satellite BB7 almost doesn’t matter. What matters is batch launch and that cadence.

$ASTS: The unsuccessful BB7 launch of course would hit the stock short-term tremendously as the next launch is not around the corner. Will act on Monday accordingly after the official statement. My thoughts for now: 1. Launch successfully: Keep my shares 2. Launch unsuccessfully and BB7 is gone: Clear sell/trim as the stock will have a lot of pressure and no upcoming catalysts For longterm investors: A hold of course. That’s the game. Sometimes you lose, sometimes you win. -RM

@ashleybezamat Looool

$ASTS: Today's NG3 failure will likely affect the rate of deployment for Amazon's constellation as well, which should put some points back on the board for AST.

@Defiantclient2 @builtbyaftee @retail_mourinho Why did they risk it with blue origin then? I don’t understand. Why would you bet your early stage deployment on a yet to be proven launcher? All the delays and now this. Really doesn’t make sense to me. Why not pulling spacex launches forward?

@builtbyaftee @retail_mourinho Next few launches are with SpaceX

@deepvaluedude Did kook say something like selling 2000 contacts? That dude is toast

$ASTS Looking forward to taking assignment

@TheSzef This is so unnecessary and redundant lol

🤯

@rahulb_co It’s just our own internal ab testing for different types of campaigns including max gmv. This is not a dig but this is not some blackbox proprietary tech, everyone has access to the same models and we are creating and testing new assets on a daily basis. Only engagement is good

@Joonzzy Can you share what creatives you tested on? It’s much harder to pull off than “traditional” creative. But when you pull it off we’ve found it converts exceptionally well.

AI content is going to make Instagram fun again. Our AI ads already stop the scroll 54% of the time. Because with AI, we have no creative limits. Today, the feed is an endless stream of "here's how I went from x to y", "a day in the life", a selfie video from the car. You get the point. It's not due to laziness. Making any video is really hard. So creators stick to one format. Then copycats follow. Suddenly and everything looks the same. AI-video will reset the bar for what's worth watching. The only limits on what you can make is... creativity. The feed will become more diverse. More individualistic. More interesting. Even on our team. Yes we make AI ads. But we don't talk about AI. We talk about ideas, script, hooks.