LoverOfTechnology

2K posts

LoverOfTechnology banner
LoverOfTechnology

LoverOfTechnology

@MathiasTheus

Legal counsel

Your moms backyard Katılım Temmuz 2014
211 Takip Edilen37 Takipçiler
Tobacco Barn
Tobacco Barn@Spiralout_one·
Arkady, Blackrock, and Nvidia all disagree. Long game wins.. I’ve heard these arguments since $30/share.. yawn $NBIS
𝐀𝐠𝐫𝐢𝐩𝐩𝐚 𝐈𝐧𝐯𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐬@Agrippa_Inv

Why I’m Not Invested in $NBIS First of all, let me make one thing clear: contrary to what you might think, I’m not an $NBIS bear. But then again, I’m not invested either… and for good reason. Nebius positions itself as a holistic cloud platform with superior software technology that caters to AI-native start-ups and enterprise clients. That in and of itself isn’t a problem, but it means they're directly competing against the largest hyperscalers in the world, who are also targeting that exact cohort with their own set of software solutions (Google Cloud, Microsoft, etc.). Nonetheless, if $NBIS can successfully differentiate itself with its core offerings, it could gain some pricing power, which is the company’s best shot at one day becoming profitable. The problem is, $NBIS is VERY far away from that… Looking at the last quarterly filing, the company’s gross expenses + depreciation equaled ~110% of its revenues. In other words, these two cost categories exceeded the value of the underlying revenues ($249.2m vs. revenue of $227.7m). To be fair, last quarter Nebius still used a 4 year depreciation schedule on GPUs, which is rather short and overstates depreciation. Adjusting for a 5 year depreciation schedule (industry standard) leads us to $144.6m of depreciation. Then, adding gross expenses of $68.5m on top gets you to $213.1m, which equals 93.5% of revenues. And keep in mind, this figure does NOT include the hundreds of millions in costs spent on SG&A, R&D, and financing (interest). So what’s my point with this? The problem is, these are STRUCTURAL costs, the kind that scale with revenue, meaning you can’t easily grow out of them through sheer scale. My point is that $NBIS' pricing power is nowhere to be seen, at least not relative to its costs. Now, most $NBIS investors would probably argue that we are still "early" and that pricing power will show up eventually. My problem with that argument is that the company seems to be allocating a very large chunk of its pipeline towards servicing hyperscalers through bare metal offerings, the kind of “bulk” service that does NOT command significant pricing power. That means, fundamentally speaking, $NBIS is likely very far away from actually becoming profitable. And while right now everyone is focused on headline figures like ARR, the market’s patience will run out eventually... it ALWAYS does for every company. One day, the market will demand to see real profits flow down to the bottom line, and I’m not sure if $NBIS is structurally positioned to deliver on that any time soon. To make matters worse, investors can’t even model out the economics of these large hyperscaler deals, because management provides absolutely 0 information on anything except headline figures. We don’t even know the CapEx associated with these deals, or at the very least, the number of GPUs they have to purchase to fulfill their end of the bargain. Contrast that with a company like $IREN, which gives you all the necessary information to build an entire P&L and cash flow model over the full course of the contract length, which is exactly what I’ve done extensively for our subscribers on Substack. I have a VERY good idea of how much actual post-tax net income $IREN is making in every year of their hyperscaler contract. There are other reasons that further point in the same direction, but I won’t get into them right now. If they fix their cost structure one day, I’m happy to reconsider my stance. But as of today, their “black box” approach to publishing details on their largest deals makes them uninvestable for me.

English
3
0
67
18K
𝐀𝐠𝐫𝐢𝐩𝐩𝐚 𝐈𝐧𝐯𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐬
Why I’m Not Invested in $NBIS First of all, let me make one thing clear: contrary to what you might think, I’m not an $NBIS bear. But then again, I’m not invested either… and for good reason. Nebius positions itself as a holistic cloud platform with superior software technology that caters to AI-native start-ups and enterprise clients. That in and of itself isn’t a problem, but it means they're directly competing against the largest hyperscalers in the world, who are also targeting that exact cohort with their own set of software solutions (Google Cloud, Microsoft, etc.). Nonetheless, if $NBIS can successfully differentiate itself with its core offerings, it could gain some pricing power, which is the company’s best shot at one day becoming profitable. The problem is, $NBIS is VERY far away from that… Looking at the last quarterly filing, the company’s gross expenses + depreciation equaled ~110% of its revenues. In other words, these two cost categories exceeded the value of the underlying revenues ($249.2m vs. revenue of $227.7m). To be fair, last quarter Nebius still used a 4 year depreciation schedule on GPUs, which is rather short and overstates depreciation. Adjusting for a 5 year depreciation schedule (industry standard) leads us to $144.6m of depreciation. Then, adding gross expenses of $68.5m on top gets you to $213.1m, which equals 93.5% of revenues. And keep in mind, this figure does NOT include the hundreds of millions in costs spent on SG&A, R&D, and financing (interest). So what’s my point with this? The problem is, these are STRUCTURAL costs, the kind that scale with revenue, meaning you can’t easily grow out of them through sheer scale. My point is that $NBIS' pricing power is nowhere to be seen, at least not relative to its costs. Now, most $NBIS investors would probably argue that we are still "early" and that pricing power will show up eventually. My problem with that argument is that the company seems to be allocating a very large chunk of its pipeline towards servicing hyperscalers through bare metal offerings, the kind of “bulk” service that does NOT command significant pricing power. That means, fundamentally speaking, $NBIS is likely very far away from actually becoming profitable. And while right now everyone is focused on headline figures like ARR, the market’s patience will run out eventually... it ALWAYS does for every company. One day, the market will demand to see real profits flow down to the bottom line, and I’m not sure if $NBIS is structurally positioned to deliver on that any time soon. To make matters worse, investors can’t even model out the economics of these large hyperscaler deals, because management provides absolutely 0 information on anything except headline figures. We don’t even know the CapEx associated with these deals, or at the very least, the number of GPUs they have to purchase to fulfill their end of the bargain. Contrast that with a company like $IREN, which gives you all the necessary information to build an entire P&L and cash flow model over the full course of the contract length, which is exactly what I’ve done extensively for our subscribers on Substack. I have a VERY good idea of how much actual post-tax net income $IREN is making in every year of their hyperscaler contract. There are other reasons that further point in the same direction, but I won’t get into them right now. If they fix their cost structure one day, I’m happy to reconsider my stance. But as of today, their “black box” approach to publishing details on their largest deals makes them uninvestable for me.
𝐀𝐠𝐫𝐢𝐩𝐩𝐚 𝐈𝐧𝐯𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐬 tweet media
English
145
62
701
210.8K
Money Qubit
Money Qubit@moneyqubit·
This isn’t about being bullish or bearish. It’s about understanding what you can and cannot underwrite as an investor. If the business model, cost structure, and deal economics aren’t clear, the risk increases significantly. $NBIS may succeed long term, but today it requires a leap of faith. And not every investor is willing to take that
𝐀𝐠𝐫𝐢𝐩𝐩𝐚 𝐈𝐧𝐯𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐬@Agrippa_Inv

Why I’m Not Invested in $NBIS First of all, let me make one thing clear: contrary to what you might think, I’m not an $NBIS bear. But then again, I’m not invested either… and for good reason. Nebius positions itself as a holistic cloud platform with superior software technology that caters to AI-native start-ups and enterprise clients. That in and of itself isn’t a problem, but it means they're directly competing against the largest hyperscalers in the world, who are also targeting that exact cohort with their own set of software solutions (Google Cloud, Microsoft, etc.). Nonetheless, if $NBIS can successfully differentiate itself with its core offerings, it could gain some pricing power, which is the company’s best shot at one day becoming profitable. The problem is, $NBIS is VERY far away from that… Looking at the last quarterly filing, the company’s gross expenses + depreciation equaled ~110% of its revenues. In other words, these two cost categories exceeded the value of the underlying revenues ($249.2m vs. revenue of $227.7m). To be fair, last quarter Nebius still used a 4 year depreciation schedule on GPUs, which is rather short and overstates depreciation. Adjusting for a 5 year depreciation schedule (industry standard) leads us to $144.6m of depreciation. Then, adding gross expenses of $68.5m on top gets you to $213.1m, which equals 93.5% of revenues. And keep in mind, this figure does NOT include the hundreds of millions in costs spent on SG&A, R&D, and financing (interest). So what’s my point with this? The problem is, these are STRUCTURAL costs, the kind that scale with revenue, meaning you can’t easily grow out of them through sheer scale. My point is that $NBIS' pricing power is nowhere to be seen, at least not relative to its costs. Now, most $NBIS investors would probably argue that we are still "early" and that pricing power will show up eventually. My problem with that argument is that the company seems to be allocating a very large chunk of its pipeline towards servicing hyperscalers through bare metal offerings, the kind of “bulk” service that does NOT command significant pricing power. That means, fundamentally speaking, $NBIS is likely very far away from actually becoming profitable. And while right now everyone is focused on headline figures like ARR, the market’s patience will run out eventually... it ALWAYS does for every company. One day, the market will demand to see real profits flow down to the bottom line, and I’m not sure if $NBIS is structurally positioned to deliver on that any time soon. To make matters worse, investors can’t even model out the economics of these large hyperscaler deals, because management provides absolutely 0 information on anything except headline figures. We don’t even know the CapEx associated with these deals, or at the very least, the number of GPUs they have to purchase to fulfill their end of the bargain. Contrast that with a company like $IREN, which gives you all the necessary information to build an entire P&L and cash flow model over the full course of the contract length, which is exactly what I’ve done extensively for our subscribers on Substack. I have a VERY good idea of how much actual post-tax net income $IREN is making in every year of their hyperscaler contract. There are other reasons that further point in the same direction, but I won’t get into them right now. If they fix their cost structure one day, I’m happy to reconsider my stance. But as of today, their “black box” approach to publishing details on their largest deals makes them uninvestable for me.

English
1
0
5
1.8K
LoverOfTechnology
LoverOfTechnology@MathiasTheus·
@SBADJ1 @BitcoinAIGuy @Agrippa_Inv @moneyqubit I never said I don’t believe they will never get another one. I’m looking forward to it as much as Christmas. I only find it hilarious that you have people like @Agrippa_Inv saying they don’t sign deals because they are picky while they signed a shit deal with $MSFT 😂
English
0
0
0
19
LoverOfTechnology retweetledi
Alexander
Alexander@AlexfromBabylon·
$NBIS After taking some time to reflect aside from the numbers I think this is a bigger deal then most people understand. What Nebius is doing really well is forging the right long term partnerships at the right time and locking in a key long term customer. From Meta's side this is also their largest deal to date. They used the Microsoft partnership to get into the bare metal game at scale, since Microsoft is more willing to sign deals with newer providers. But unless cost of capital is a factor, which benefit Microsoft and Google triple A ratings, the best long term neocloud partners is probably Meta. Meta is the only player who does not sell an external compute platform to third parties unlike Microsoft, Google and Amazon. Hence longer term its the only player of this size, which will not directly compete with Nebius hyperscaler ambitions. Meta is also aggresively building internal datacenter capacity in a sense that some say they are the 4th (internal) hyperscaler by scale, but their platform is way more suitable for long term neocloud corporation. Why? Because Meta's compute demand cannot be as planned as Google, Microsoft and Amazon due to the nature of their business. Social media compute usages are way more peak / cycle driven then regular enterprise business users. That means Meta needs to be able to spin up and down compute very fast. It does not make sense to have all that peak driven capacity inhouse. That's why Meta will always need deeper long term relationships with neoclouds and they prefer that over direct buying from Microsoft, Google and Amazon who compete in other layers. With this deal Nebius just became that partner of choice for Meta and this is how I also view that $15 billion backstop. It's a sign of a deep long term strategic partnership for both. Microsoft, Google and Amazon will aggresively in house demand as soon as they can once the overflow period is over. Sure not all is feasible and limited flexible capacity is useful, but Meta will always need more flexible compute then the ones above. They are a marquee customer for a Neocloud. Again management clearly demonstrates they know what they are doing!
Nebius@nebiusai

Nebius signs a new AI infrastructure agreement with Meta (up to ~$27B). "We are pleased to expand our significant partnership... to accelerate the build-out and growth of our core AI cloud business." - CEO Arkady Volozh Read more: nebius.com/newsroom/nebiu…

English
3
6
90
15.2K
Stock Investor, AIF
Stock Investor, AIF@stocktrader989·
@MathiasTheus @Agrippa_Inv @Lazarus_Capital Just look at the components 9/30 Income Statement and 12/31 Income Statement Revenue up 50% Expenses up 50% Loss up over 100% The revenue growth you are focusing on happened, but so did the expenses. Since 9/30 was ~ $120 million loss, the 12/31 loss doubled to ~$250 million.
English
1
0
0
15
Stock Investor, AIF
Stock Investor, AIF@stocktrader989·
@MathiasTheus @Agrippa_Inv @Lazarus_Capital When business settles, revenue growth settles and so does expense growth. If growth goes to other companies, so does hogher expenses. However, you are still missing the point that expenses will alwsys exceed revenue and thus $NBIS will have losses each quarter.
English
1
0
0
82
LoverOfTechnology
LoverOfTechnology@MathiasTheus·
@MktMavPro Hey, if you can’t sign any deals why not focus on *amazing* water bottles. Literally so comical you can’t make this up. In the meantime you have @Agrippa_Inv saying $IREN isn’t signing deals because they are picky, even though their $MSFT-deal had shit terms 😂😂
English
0
0
0
29
LoverOfTechnology
LoverOfTechnology@MathiasTheus·
@stocktrader989 @Agrippa_Inv @Lazarus_Capital Eventually it will settle when their business settles and they aren’t in the same rapid growth cycle. You and everyone else seem to forget $NBIS has a ton of other companies to sell to besides hyperscalers. Multiple revenue streams will make it a killer company in the future.
English
2
0
0
37
Stock Investor, AIF
Stock Investor, AIF@stocktrader989·
@MathiasTheus @Agrippa_Inv @Lazarus_Capital I agree with you if the costs are FIXED costs However, the energy costs & depreciation costs are variable costs (they grow in the same proportion as revenue and they represent 100% of revenue). The SGA is fixed costs but will grow also. Investors should understand this!!!
English
1
0
1
18
Stock Investor, AIF
Stock Investor, AIF@stocktrader989·
@MathiasTheus @Agrippa_Inv @Lazarus_Capital $NBIS growth will not be getting them out of losses. Their hosting fees, energy & SGA fees and depreciation ate up 180% of revenue (not counting the additional 50M per quarter tech fees). As revenue grows, so does the energy & depreciation proportionally and more SGA costs
English
1
0
0
123