Trav

@MCI_mikee @unusual_whales Aren’t the kind of forced to do this? Or be completely taken over

It is a completely surreal statement to make while you simultaneously have the Strait of Hormuz choked off and your proxies heavily involved… You cannot claim to avoid war while actively holding the global energy market hostage just to maximize your leverage at the negotiating table…

Iran's Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei: We did not seek war; do not seek it.

@EricTrump @SeongWooIQ300 HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

@SeongWooIQ300 I never said this…

@amitisinvesting Ugly *government*

last thursday, we had a similar decline to what we are seeing today...but it was for really no reason then we recovered massively on friday one week later, today, we are once again seeing new lows from last week for what it feels like is no major headline amazing companies getting sold off on great earnings utilities, defensives, industrials leading the way $VZ is up 20% this year, last time it did that? 2006 choppiness isn't even the word...this market is moody, emotional, thinks AI is dead one day then thinks AI will destroy every industry the next...just a hard environment to navigate but the winners of the past few years are simply getting destroyed regardless of good earnings the major reason I can point to, i think, is capex spend is so large that big tech will see negative FCF and that is leading to a rotation out of not only big tech but also high-beta growth, many sectors (space, quantum, nuclear) all now down YTD compared to January ugly environment

@ChrisCamillo No way that’s real 🤣

Menlo Park might be the worst Christmas tree market on earth.

@amitisinvesting Dicey 😭

either pre-FOMC pump or getting ready to get rug pulled 🥶 $BTC $ETH

@wallstengine Bullish?

$AMD CEO SU: AMD WILL PAY 15% TAX ON MI308 CHIP EXPORTS TO CHINA.

@ChrisCamillo @jackhandey14 Assuming you’re in options on $TAC

@jackhandey14 Patience

Thankful for the support, the ideas, the pushback on my less than perfect theses, and the wave of increasingly attractive lady bots jumping on every post within milliseconds. Having you all has made this yr’s highs and lows a lot more fun.

@amitisinvesting Everybody wanted a pullback but nobody wanted to buy on the dip

so last week S&P was down 4% and the biggest concern was AI bubble today S&P 1% away from ATHs, looks like a rate cut is happening, retail stocks actually CHALLENGING the “consumer is weak” narrative, and labor market is weak but not horrible as per jobless claims all of this while $NVDA is still down 15% from all time highs even after those earnings, now trading at 25x 2026 earnings the largest company in the S&P is down but the S&P being up means we are broadening which is very healthy narratives can shift so quickly

@amitisinvesting Did he actually come out with a headline though?

i was wondering what headline Trump might come out with to stabilize the markets in April it was as simple as reversing the tariffs and posting to buy the dip this time is much more complicated given the rate cut situation + rising inflation so what better headline than to pump the world’s most important company that controls the entire market…

@ChrisCamillo The big short narrative is over

But Burry, Thiel, SoftBank, Druckenmiller… guess not.

@ericjackson The entire government is also circular.. it’s not a new idea

So let me get this straight… If Anthropic/OpenAI take money from Microsoft or NVIDIA = “AI BUBBLE!!! 🚨” But if they take money from a16z or PE guys in fleece vests = “totally normal, nothing to see here.” Did I get the rules of Bubble Logic™ right? 😂

@amitisinvesting Great Nvidia earnings might give us some hope next week

very ugly premarkets 3 reasons it seems like the wind is getting taken out: - no data transparency from October - crypto de-leveraging - AI capex trade fears last Friday, we had the shutdown headline to reverse the pain today, I don’t know what headline reverses it unless the market simply thinks the selloff has become overdone no one knows if that will happen or if the bottom continues to fall out, but margin calls/stop losses/forced liquidations all could contribute to a further hit until you have buyers and algos step in and begin buying important to just be liquid/solvent enough to last through a day like this if it does get worse wild card is if Trump comes out and says something, only thing I can imagine is potentially more tariff reductions to ease prices but market may need more

@amitisinvesting The old bait and switch 🤣

intraday selloff has officially gotten nasty either we bounce or its time to revisit some lows we did a full V shape on Friday based on shutdown ending headlines they really made us think our politicans going back to work would be bullish 😂

@Jake__Wujastyk @AGutiGarcia But I sprint marathons

@AGutiGarcia Its a marathon not a sprint

If your account is up 30% or more YTD after this recent shenanigans over the last month, you should be extremely, extremely happy.

@amitisinvesting It’s hilarious that everyone president comes in talks about the nations debt. And yet they do nothing about it except ADD more debt exponentially. This reality tv show is crazy

BESSENT THIS MORNING: - A $2,000 rebate would be for those making less than $100,000, but it has not been decided - We are going to unveil substantial tariff reductions over the coming days on coffee, bananas, and several other items. tariffs coming down, stimulus coming in

@amitisinvesting Wall Street engine just said republicans rejected it

BREAKING: Democrats are getting ready to offer reopening the government if health care subsidies are extended to one year. Some House Republicans have agreed with this proposal, but now it depends on Senate Republicans to get on board with this. Markets are trying to flip green on the idea of the shutdown possibly ending by this weekend.

@amitisinvesting No ones talking about it because they don’t want it to tumble

S&P trying to go green after wrecking everybody this morning 😂 goodness…what a day

@sloejoejames @amitisinvesting I mean same way Trump said “it’s a good time to buy”

$PLTR Really important point below: Michael Burry never publishes his 13F early. This is one of the first times in a decade that he did…likely because he was severely underwater on his Palantir puts. Given he bought those puts at any time during July - September (Q3) then unless he bought Palantir puts at $200, which wouldn’t be possible since that happened during Q4, he was underwater. Part of the reason to disclose early may have been to get the market to use the headline to then allow him to get exit liquidity since the trade was simply not going his way. While Palantir is down from earnings, it still may have not reached a level for him to make any meaningful profit. If he started buying puts at $175 in August…then we are at the same price today. If he bought puts any price below $175 then he’s underwater, and if he bought them above $175, today is the first day he’s even seeing any level of potential gains. If he actually was shorting and didn’t just have puts, then he was really feeling the pain over the past few months since he initiated the position. Definitely feels the early disclosure was to get market positioning to potentially exit.

@amitisinvesting On top of him deleting his tweet minutes later ..

@sama So when’s the partnership with INTL coming

I would like to clarify a few things. First, the obvious one: we do not have or want government guarantees for OpenAI datacenters. We believe that governments should not pick winners or losers, and that taxpayers should not bail out companies that make bad business decisions or otherwise lose in the market. If one company fails, other companies will do good work. What we do think might make sense is governments building (and owning) their own AI infrastructure, but then the upside of that should flow to the government as well. We can imagine a world where governments decide to offtake a lot of computing power and get to decide how to use it, and it may make sense to provide lower cost of capital to do so. Building a strategic national reserve of computing power makes a lot of sense. But this should be for the government’s benefit, not the benefit of private companies. The one area where we have discussed loan guarantees is as part of supporting the buildout of semiconductor fabs in the US, where we and other companies have responded to the government’s call and where we would be happy to help (though we did not formally apply). The basic idea there has been ensuring that the sourcing of the chip supply chain is as American as possible in order to bring jobs and industrialization back to the US, and to enhance the strategic position of the US with an independent supply chain, for the benefit of all American companies. This is of course different from governments guaranteeing private-benefit datacenter buildouts. There are at least 3 “questions behind the question” here that are understandably causing concern. First, “How is OpenAI going to pay for all this infrastructure it is signing up for?” We expect to end this year above $20 billion in annualized revenue run rate and grow to hundreds of billion by 2030. We are looking at commitments of about $1.4 trillion over the next 8 years. Obviously this requires continued revenue growth, and each doubling is a lot of work! But we are feeling good about our prospects there; we are quite excited about our upcoming enterprise offering for example, and there are categories like new consumer devices and robotics that we also expect to be very significant. But there are also new categories we have a hard time putting specifics on like AI that can do scientific discovery, which we will touch on later. We are also looking at ways to more directly sell compute capacity to other companies (and people); we are pretty sure the world is going to need a lot of “AI cloud”, and we are excited to offer this. We may also raise more equity or debt capital in the future. But everything we currently see suggests that the world is going to need a great deal more computing power than what we are already planning for. Second, “Is OpenAI trying to become too big to fail, and should the government pick winners and losers?” Our answer on this is an unequivocal no. If we screw up and can’t fix it, we should fail, and other companies will continue on doing good work and servicing customers. That’s how capitalism works and the ecosystem and economy would be fine. We plan to be a wildly successful company, but if we get it wrong, that’s on us. Our CFO talked about government financing yesterday, and then later clarified her point underscoring that she could have phrased things more clearly. As mentioned above, we think that the US government should have a national strategy for its own AI infrastructure. Tyler Cowen asked me a few weeks ago about the federal government becoming the insurer of last resort for AI, in the sense of risks (like nuclear power) not about overbuild. I said “I do think the government ends up as the insurer of last resort, but I think I mean that in a different way than you mean that, and I don’t expect them to actually be writing the policies in the way that maybe they do for nuclear”. Again, this was in a totally different context than datacenter buildout, and not about bailing out a company. What we were talking about is something going catastrophically wrong—say, a rogue actor using an AI to coordinate a large-scale cyberattack that disrupts critical infrastructure—and how intentional misuse of AI could cause harm at a scale that only the government could deal with. I do not think the government should be writing insurance policies for AI companies. Third, “Why do you need to spend so much now, instead of growing more slowly?”. We are trying to build the infrastructure for a future economy powered by AI, and given everything we see on the horizon in our research program, this is the time to invest to be really scaling up our technology. Massive infrastructure projects take quite awhile to build, so we have to start now. Based on the trends we are seeing of how people are using AI and how much of it they would like to use, we believe the risk to OpenAI of not having enough computing power is more significant and more likely than the risk of having too much. Even today, we and others have to rate limit our products and not offer new features and models because we face such a severe compute constraint. In a world where AI can make important scientific breakthroughs but at the cost of tremendous amounts of computing power, we want to be ready to meet that moment. And we no longer think it’s in the distant future. Our mission requires us to do what we can to not wait many more years to apply AI to hard problems, like contributing to curing deadly diseases, and to bring the benefits of AGI to people as soon as possible. Also, we want a world of abundant and cheap AI. We expect massive demand for this technology, and for it to improve people’s lives in many ways. It is a great privilege to get to be in the arena, and to have the conviction to take a run at building infrastructure at such scale for something so important. This is the bet we are making, and given our vantage point, we feel good about it. But we of course could be wrong, and the market—not the government—will deal with it if we are.