OC Family Office

6.5K posts

OC Family Office

OC Family Office

@thrivecap

Katılım Nisan 2009
1.7K Takip Edilen1.9K Takipçiler
OC Family Office
OC Family Office@thrivecap·
Very off. Missing: (1) $1B Ares pref + 20% warrants at RailCo — flows out of your $3B Rail EV before FIP common sees a dime; (2) $192M Series B pref at HoldCo. Also, Jeff at $480M EV is below its $975M project debt — equity goes to debtors there, not FIP. Real number is closer to $5–6/share at your multiples, not $13
English
2
0
1
143
𝐍𝐢𝐜𝐤𝐚𝐥𝐨𝐛𝐞 𝐔𝐥𝐭𝐫𝐚
𝐍𝐢𝐜𝐤𝐚𝐥𝐨𝐛𝐞 𝐔𝐥𝐭𝐫𝐚@NickalobeUltra·
If all goes to plan, $FIP could 3x from here by mid 2027. My math: Trains: 200mm x 15 = 3B Jeff: 60mm x 8 = ~500mm Rep (??): 150mm Total 2027 EV = 3.65B Less debt (net of cash, LR sale) = 2.2B Leave ~1.5B of market cap vs today’s 600mm. How far off am I
English
1
0
0
393
Frank
Frank@justfactstruth·
@thrivecap @Arturo10185 Lets see how earnings are today, how Transtar synergies + growth is working out and if Jeff and Repauno have converted contracts...
English
1
0
1
117
Frank
Frank@justfactstruth·
$FIP Citizens analyst update- Commentary from Blackstone's earnings call around the longer-term deployment and value creation opportunity in/around AI, including power and gas related infrastructure reinforces value creation opportunity at Long Ridge. We're encouraged by the constructive commentary we heard on Blackstone's earnings call (and the related read-throughs to FIP), specifically as it relates to the value creation opportunity at Long Ridge (via a sale), and we have even more confidence that a monetization event will take place in the coming months, which will clearly have positive implications on FIP's balance sheet as well as the stock. We still see a scenario where Long Ridge is sold for ~$1.5B+ EV, implying ~$400M+ of realized equity value, the vast majority of which will be available for future use/deployment (i.e., de-leveraging, organic/inorganic growth opportunities, etc.). So, we see a particularly interesting setup for FIP heading into 1Q26 earnings as well as what will likely be a formal sale announcement of Long Ridge (in the coming months), and we continue to believe the SOTP valuation (i.e., fair value of each individual asset/business) is significantly higher than the current market cap of ~$650M (and we believe realization event(s) will help close this gap). Accordingly, we reiterate our Market Outperform rating and $12 price target, which implies an ~12.5x multiple on our 2027E EV/EBITDA based on our SOTP valuation approach.
English
1
0
8
2.3K
OC Family Office
OC Family Office@thrivecap·
Tried DM’ing you, not sure those get through. Curious how you’re thinking about the current risk/reward post–Long Ridge sale? I’m unsure whether this truly de-risks the path to common equity value, given Jefferson / Repauno execution has been problematic. I’ve trimmed all week into the print due to uncertainty — but curious how you / others are sizing FIP position and what milestones you think matter most from here?
English
1
0
0
69
Frank
Frank@justfactstruth·
@thrivecap @Arturo10185 Transtar is the key! They will likely sell Repauno/ Jefferson once more advanced/ matured and buy rail assets
English
1
0
1
176
OC Family Office
OC Family Office@thrivecap·
Why indeed? This management team, ughh. I know nothing about TimberHP, so hopefully it’s immaterial and not another distraction. FIP has been convoluted for years; byzantine asset mix with a dizzying capital stack on every piece. You basically need a distressed-credit analyst and an LBO model for each silo just to follow the story.
English
0
0
0
35
OC Family Office
OC Family Office@thrivecap·
@justfactstruth @Arturo10185 And genuinely confused by market action last two sessions. Buyers liked the sale / liquidity while sellers & bears didn’t like price? No real read through on Q. I like mgmt — but seems like this was a bit of a forced transaction. Thoughts? Any notes from CP, Citizens or BTIG?
English
0
0
0
15
OC Family Office
OC Family Office@thrivecap·
@justfactstruth @Arturo10185 Seems now equity 💯 contingent on the “perpetually advanced” contracts / LOIs of Jefferson and Repauno. Nothing new about questioning credibility re: delayed ramp schedules — BUT this sale @ this price does signal *something* — not sure exactly what, though? More divestitures?
English
2
0
0
110
Frank
Frank@justfactstruth·
@Arturo10185 at least $1.5B ...and we don't know if all the land is included
English
2
0
0
160
Jason Kam
Jason Kam@MapleLeafCap·
Was chatting with one of the smartest guys I know in public equities this week and talked about SaaS stocks, his answer still sticks with me. Me: You spending any time in SaaS land at all? Him: You're not talking to somebody who woke up a loser. SaaS is gonna play defense for the next decade, that's a loser position, I don't back losers, I don't short exponential rise of intelligence that will iron out all friction between atom and bits. He obviously watches the Jensen interview.
English
30
18
402
100.8K
OC Family Office
OC Family Office@thrivecap·
@price_is_truth What are you valuing the Anthropic investment at? Longer term, do you see the core business successfully evolving? — still don’t see what exactly they want to be if not a video company.
English
0
0
0
30
Price is Truth
Price is Truth@price_is_truth·
When Anthropic goes public, we’re gonna blink and $ZM will be at $125. I need to buy more. You see that multi-year base starting to turn bullish? Product integration with Anthropic, ownership stake, and Zoom appears to be one of the few software companies unaffected by Claude. Own it going into the IPO. I think the hype of Anthropic going public and formalizing a valuation for the public markets will bring $ZM up with it. It’s essentially a proxy. The IPO could happen as early as October this year.
Price is Truth tweet media
English
1
0
1
171
SPAC Trader
SPAC Trader@Spac__Trader·
$PCSC is back within 2% of its ~$10.76 NAV. Lower float with only 8M shares and over $3 off the $14+ highs. It was $12.50s before the war began. $240M PIPE from blue-chip investors. This is currently my largest position given the lack of DAs and the current RR on it.
SPAC Trader tweet media
SP🅰️C-M🅰️N@SPACMAN17

$PCSC announced on 12/5 it would merge with @freenome, a blood-based multi-cancer early detection (“MCED”) play In this 🧵 I’ll provide an overview of @freenome, the MCED market and the monster TAM tied to it, and a high-level valuation framework Not investment advice. DYODD!

English
1
0
9
2.9K
OC Family Office
OC Family Office@thrivecap·
@conorsen So what’s your take? Long term thesis intact? — anything stand out? Not much commentary I think means it’s just chugging along despite the AH reaction
English
0
0
0
208
Conor Sen
Conor Sen@conorsen·
A little surprised I haven’t seen a single post about $NFLX earnings. Just shows how things have shifted. Unless it’s Trump or AI nobody cares.
English
12
4
101
28.1K
OC Family Office
OC Family Office@thrivecap·
@given2tweet Don’t you think expected? — maybe not by markets, but ceasefire will continue, will likely be extended, and will be back and forth. No? Question was why anyone would expect a quick resolution. (How are you btw buddy!? lol)
English
1
0
0
139
OC Family Office
OC Family Office@thrivecap·
@JasperRidley @Jebaim3 Interesting. How is it a play on GLP1? Is there established correlation in terms of lipo suction procedures post weight loss from these pills?
English
1
0
1
70
Jasper Ridley
Jasper Ridley@JasperRidley·
@Jebaim3 $AIRS - 90%+ of stock held by insiders with significant insider buying - just paid down nearly all debt - new CEO 12 months on job has engineered return to growth - play on GLP1 adoption with huge revenue growth and margin expansion potential
English
3
0
16
4.8K
TheBigBerbowski
TheBigBerbowski@TheBigBerbowski·
Best names under 2b market cap? - Insiders with skin in the game - Low debt / Low risk of dilution - Turnarounds at an inflection point Any ideas?
English
97
7
155
55.6K
J’anna
J’anna@SigmaFemale1818·
Here are my final thoughts, hope it helps: 1. NASA’s shift toward a Core Module undeniably favors Axiom’s existing roadmap. However, structurally advantaged doesn't mean guaranteed. The strategic investment in Max Space, (I think) was a preemptive strike by Voyager and is the specific answer to the NASA RFI. Expandable modules are the only way to provide the massive research volume NASA wants, while meeting the docking requirements of an aging ISS. (Again, this is Me speculating). I hope to learn more about this down the line. In the "Core Module" bidding war, the winner isn't who docks first, it’s who provides the most utility for the lowest launch cost and Voyager does just that! Their Bishop Airlock history gives them "docking intel" that Vast and other newcomers lack. They aren't learning how to interface with the ISS; they’ve been doing it for years. My bullish view is, that Voyager will be awarded both, they have what it takes to do it (financially/structurally/intellectually). Dylan had hinted at multiple space stations in LEO. But, of course there is a concern of it being viewed as a monopoly, (also sets up for a potential battle between Space Force/DoD/NASA they’re gonna want assurances) In which case, I could envision Axiom getting the Modular contract, and Voyager the ‘freeflyer’ contract… Either way Voyager is positioned to carry on, unimpeded, bc they are by ‘design, nimble and diversified. 2. Vast (VC) is currently a "burn-heavy" venture play. $500M sounds like a lot, but in station development, that’s a “deposit." Voyager’s revenue continuity model means they aren't waiting for the next VC round. The CLD pause is likely NASA’s way of letting the market shake out the weak hands and by adding SAA’s it gives more flexibility. By the time Phase II (C3DO) resumes, NASA will be looking for the most stable balance sheet. With $704M in liquidity, Voyager is the one standing on solid ground, (not to mention their significant global backers), while others are burning through their raises. 3. Voyager is likely the only company currently "Defense-Ready" enough to absorb the risk of both paths. While NASA wants two companies, the RFI suggests they are preparing for a "High-Volume, Single-Prime" reality…that’s how I’m reading. NFA 🚨 Correction: The RFI response deadline for LEO Core Modules is April 8. The April 23 deadline is for lunar habitats. Formal proposals due in June 👀 SO excited to watch Artemis 2 Launch 🥂
J’anna@SigmaFemale1818

$VOYG BUILT FOR WHAT'S NEXT 🔹 MISSION READY 2026 @Starlab_Space Global Alliance: Strategic Equity & Institutional Framework Partnered for Success Core Equity Partners (Joint Venture Owners) These companies formed Starlab Space LLC, a global joint venture. They share the capital costs, risks, and eventual operational profits of the station. 🔹 Voyager Space (USA): The majority owner and lead partner. They serve as the prime contractor for NASA’s Commercial LEO Destinations (CLD) program. 🔹 Airbus Defense and Space (Europe): The primary technical partner. Airbus provides the human-rated engineering expertise and leads the "Starlab Space Europe" subsidiary to capture European Space Agency (ESA) contracts. 🔹Mitsubishi Corporation (Japan): Joined in early 2024 to represent the Japanese space economy. Their investment secures a dedicated path for JAXA (Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency) to transition from the ISS to Starlab. 🔹 MDA Space (Canada): Joined in early 2024. As the global leader in space robotics, their equity stake ensures Starlab is equipped with Canadian robotics (SKYMAKER™) and secures Canada’s place in the post-ISS era. Why this ‘Super Alliance’ matters: By having the leading aerospace entities of four major space-faring regions as equity owners, Starlab effectively captures the ‘Sovereign Demand’ of their respective nations. This makes Starlab the only commercial station with a built-in, multi-national customer base from day one. Strategic Financial Investors These firms have invested capital directly into Voyager Space or the Starlab venture to fund its multi-year development. 🔹 Janus Henderson Investors: A major institutional investor that participated in strategic funding rounds to strengthen Voyager’s balance sheet for the "Post-ISS" transition. 🔹 Sumitomo Mitsui Trust Bank (SuMi TRUST): A key Japanese financial partner that invested alongside Mitsubishi to deepen the Japanese industrial tie-in. 🔹 NewSpace Capital: A private equity firm focused on the space supply chain that has backed Voyager's growth and consolidation strategy. 🔹 Franklin Templeton: Known to hold significant positions in Voyager through their specialized aerospace and technology funds. 🔹 Seven Grand Managers (SGM): SGM is known for taking concentrated, long-term positions in ‘platform’ companies, has more that $1B assets under management. Their presence in Starlab provides a ‘liquidity buffer’ that allows Voyager to focus on multi-year technical milestones (like the CDR) without being forced into predatory financing. 🔹 Palantir Technologies ($PLTR) ~1% (Voyager Space) Provides the AI/Data ‘Digital Backbone’ for Starlab; reinforces the Hardware + Software ‘Neo-Prime’ model. High institutional ownership, particularly among ‘Active’ managers like Janus Henderson, typically signals that the company has moved past its ‘speculative’ phase and is now being valued based on its recurring defense revenue and backlog execution. 🔸The following list represents the top 10 public institutional owners based on the most recent 13F filings

English
1
0
2
188
J’anna
J’anna@SigmaFemale1818·
$VOYG 🔹 Wedbush (Dan Ives): $46.00 (Outperform). Reiterated March 13, 2026, citing the 140,000 sq. ft. Space Beach Center opening as a major catalyst for manufacturing scale. 🔹 J.P. Morgan (Christopher Barbero): $43.00 (Overweight) Focused on the company's "Defense Neo-Prime" status and integration of the Golden Dome missile defense programs. 🔹 Jefferies (Sheila Kahyaoglu): $40.00 (Buy) Maintained following the passing of the Commercial Critical Design Review (CCDR) for Starlab. 🔹 KeyBanc: $45.00 (Overweight). 🔹 Wolfe Research (Myles Walton): $41.00 (Outperform) Adjusted from $50.00 previously. 🔹 BofA Securities (Ronald Epstein): $50.00 (Buy) Currently the high on the Street, highlighting the long-term revenue potential of the Starlab commercial reservation backlog. 🔹Citi initiated coverage with a Buy rating and a $36 price target. Summary of Consensus: Average Target - $41.25 Strong ‘BUY’ status Analysts cite Voyager’s aggressive vertical integration in energetics, and propulsion as a key differentiator. Backlog, revenue potential and Starlab progress as key factors.
J’anna tweet media
English
2
1
5
886
J’anna
J’anna@SigmaFemale1818·
There’s a lot to unpack here, and I’m time constrained at the moment. Personally, I am not concerned about Vast. They have had a lot of challenges and continue to delay their launch and are not diversely integrated, which creates more financial hardship for them. While, it’s true Axiom is well positioned, and I believe Voyager can compete with its partnership with MaxSpace expandable space stations.There is a difference between the CLD program and C3DO. C3DO awards, NOT cancelled, but delayed until Summer/Fall. The recent RFI last week, gives companies until April 23 to submit their ideas. Staying tuned on that. I will revisit ur questions later in the day to help address ur concerns…
English
1
0
1
58
OC Family Office
OC Family Office@thrivecap·
@SigmaFemale1818 I get your read that Ignition = validation. But if NASA is moving toward buying infrastructure rather than picking winners in a speculative race, doesn’t that actually favor Axiom sitting on the ISS over Starlab building from scratch? That’s part I keep going back and forth on.
English
0
0
0
41
OC Family Office
OC Family Office@thrivecap·
@SigmaFemale1818 The other thing bugging me: CLD Phase II has been on hold since Jan 28 with no new timeline, Vast just raised $500M and won a PAM, and NASA’s own ISS program manager went on record questioning whether commercial stations pencil without bigger gov’t subsidies.
English
1
0
0
35

Keşfet

@justfactstruth @Arturo10185 @HegelianMutt @MapleLeafCap @SerfCapital @price_is_truth @Spac__Trader @conorsen