Stylianos Armaos

While $TSLA bulls continue to insist that only $TSLA can scale unsupervised autonomous vehicles, the evidence is clear that several players will offer unsupervised autonomous ride hailing over the next 12-18 months, joining $GOOG, $BIDU, $PONY, $WRD, $ZOOX, $NVDA, and $UBER in what is becoming a very crowded and competitive space. For years I have argued TSLA will be there but so will a handful of others. As this becomes clear to investors, TSLA’s 2026 P/E of 216x becomes increasingly questionable.

Odds on where Giannis Antetokounmpo will play next season if he is traded from Milwaukee, via Kalshi: 20% — Knicks 15% — Celtics 15% — Blazers 13% — Heat 11% — Nets 11% — Pistons 5% — Magic 3% — Rockets 2% — Warriors

FSD Supervised isn’t limited to select highways or specific conditions – it works wherever it’s available It can handle your daily commute or drive you across the country

Duolingo closed at $112 yesterday. That’s down 70% from its May 2025 high of $544. The revenue story is real. Duolingo went from $162M in 2021 to nearly $1B in trailing revenue. 41% YoY growth last quarter. 50 million DAUs. Record EBITDA margins approaching 30%. By every operating metric, this company is executing at an elite level. So why has the market vaporized $16B+ in market cap since May? Three things happened at once. Bookings growth decelerated from the pandemic-era highs, and Goldman and Wells Fargo both flagged “challenging comparisons” ahead. The CFO who steered the company through its entire public life announced his departure. And the AI narrative flipped from tailwind to existential threat in investor minds. Then T-Mobile dropped a bomb three days ago. They announced “Live Translation,” a real-time AI translation service built directly into their wireless network. Over 50 languages. No app, no download, no subscription. Works on a flip phone. The stock fell another 10% in a single session. The market is now asking a question it never had to ask before: if AI can translate any conversation in real time at the network level, what’s the premium on spending 2,000 hours learning a language the hard way? Duolingo trades at 6x sales today. At its peak it traded at 30x+. The business grew into its valuation and then the valuation collapsed anyway. The market isn’t repricing the present. It’s repricing a future where the entire category of “language learning” gets compressed by AI that skips the learning part entirely. Revenue up 410% and stock down 70%. The market is telling you that growth in a category AI might eliminate gets valued at zero.

$AMD has entered the fortune making zone. The risk/reward is the best I've seen in the AI space.

NEWS: Tesla has filed new trademark applications for its next-generation Roadster, hinting that the unveil is drawing closer. The first application includes a stylized “Roadster” wordmark, while the second includes what seems to be the Roadster’s new design. USPTO filings below:

Alright. I’m going to push back on this not emotionally, just analytically. $HIMS A lot of what you’ve laid out sounds compelling because it’s detailed and directional. But several of these conclusions jump from interesting signal to structural collapse without proving causation. That gap matters. Let’s go piece by piece. First, the 51.6% website traffic decline. That’s a serious number no argument there. But for a DTC healthcare company, web traffic isn’t the whole funnel anymore. A meaningful portion of acquisition has shifted to mobile-first, paid social, influencer-driven, and in-app flows. Organic desktop traffic can fall sharply while paid and app-driven conversions remain stable. The key question isn’t traffic volume it’s subscriber net adds and CAC efficiency. Without conversion rate data or disclosed marketing spend trends, we can’t confidently conclude a CAC death spiral. The historical comps (Groupon, Zillow, HomeAdvisor) also aren’t apples-to-apples. Those were marketplace or housing-exposed models with macro shocks and structural model flaws. $HIMS is subscription-based telehealth with recurring revenue. That’s a different elasticity profile. Reminder: traffic ≠ revenue ≠ subscriber retention. Now the Stocktwits and Reddit argument. Retail chatter collapsing isn’t automatically bearish. In fact, speculative social engagement peaking and then fading often marks the end of momentum froth not necessarily the start of structural decay. Some of the strongest bottoms form when retail loses interest and volume dries up. Low noise can precede accumulation. Also, sentiment staying at 77 while price falls doesn’t automatically equal “distribution.” It can also mean core holders are sticky. Value traps exist, yes but so do temporary multiple compressions during growth slowdowns. The CEO posting less on X is probably the weakest signal in the entire thesis. Executive social media frequency is NOT a reliable earnings predictor. Correlation there is extremely thin. The more legitimate concerns in your framework are: 1. Traffic decline magnitude 2. Hiring slowdown 3. Potential growth deceleration 4. Margin sensitivity if paid marketing replaces organic Those are real. Those deserve modeling. But projecting an automatic additional 25–35% downside based purely on alt-data sentiment compression assumes: 1. Traffic decline converts directly to revenue collapse 2. Subscriber churn exceeds guidance 3. Market fully reprices to a lower terminal growth rate 4. Shorts press and aren’t forced to cover That’s a stacked assumption chain. Could it happen? Yes. Is it statistically inevitable based on these signals alone? No. Right now, what IHMS looks like is this: 1. Heavy short positioning (~32% float) 2. Price at major demand 3. Growth deceleration fears 4. Mixed alternative data 5. Sentiment not yet capitulated That’s not a clean short. It’s also not a clean long. It’s a volatility setup. If Q4 shows subscriber growth holding and CAC stable, this entire “death spiral” narrative unwinds fast. If growth materially misses, then your structural deterioration thesis gains teeth. Still, zooming out, the $HIMS long-term thesis remains compelling the debate is timing and execution, not whether the opportunity exists.