WeatherPundit

I’d looooove to understand the ideation execution and approval process of these tweets and this account.

@atelicinvest What kind of check sizes are you targeting?

Look at me, ma - I'm a pro now

@SleepwellCap Elvis Presley ain't got no soul Bo Diddley is rock'n'roll (damn right) You may dig on the Rolling Stones But they ain't the first place the credit belongs

It's quite astonishing - and rarely gets talked about - that a vast majority of musical genres that shaped popular music can be traced back to Black communities: rock'n'roll, R&B, soul, disco, hip-hop, house/techno, reggaeton, salsa, funk, reggae, gospel. Truly extraordinary.

@stevesi What are you trying to say?

It can't be that NYC needs more teachers than the budget. It definitely doesn't have more students. It looks like the budget per student keeps increasing as students decrease.

@vanckzhu She needs to upgrade to the paid version!

My mother asked an LLM if she can cut half a tree and the LLM said yes, and suggested cutting the bottom half because it’s easier to reach

directed by martin scorsese.

@BK8374021732854 @dalibali2 @akhenosiris

@dalibali2 @akhenosiris So are they just going to watch their stock go to zero?

I think the reason many of us are so intrigued by shitlab is that there is an enormous opportunity for them to be relevant as a hybrid pipeline platform, and also execution risk. At 2x revenue that seems to be a favorable r/r to take a gamble

@P_Remarks How does an investor process that? Is it a bigger upside risk or downside risk?

@hushky6 @dalibali2

@dalibali2 idk i think it could be a masochism thing too

@blondesnmoney Are you Satoshi?

@SavneetS @sevencornerscap This is great. Many supporters for what you're building with $PAR but the public narrative has gotten muddled. Even occasional management commentary / clarifications will be helpful!

@sevencornerscap I can’t tweet now! Finally got approval.

Interesting that the CEO of $PAR hasn’t tweeted in a year now (while the stock drops >70%)…

@compound248 Looking forward to future interviews with Dario, Zuck and Gary Marcus.

1) what

@dalibali2 Controlling the means of podcast production

We're re-focusing our resources to the highest value projects....which is a podcast?

@Finding_Moats Animated franchises like Toy Story (movie #5 in 2026), Frozen (#3 in 2027), Incredibles (#3 in 2028) seem to be quite long lasting and incredibly hard for other studios to establish. Universal has done really well with Despicable Me / Minions, but not sure anyone else compares.

@Finding_Moats Days of monoculture are over for sure, but I'd argue $DIS still clearly leads in kids IP. Consistently delivering $1B+ films (Inside Out 2, Lilo & Stitch, Moana 2, Zootopia 2 in just past two years), directly feeding Disney+ and obviously also fueling its huge Parks business.

My son has watched almost nothing from Disney's IP catalog. Cars is the only exception (and even that was somewhat accidental). At his age, I consumed everything Disney put out that my parents allowed. It was not a choice — it was simply the default. $DIS owned that space, at least in my house. Now he happily watches a dozen different shows from different platforms and studios. Some of them he loves deeply. None of them feel like they are building toward anything lasting (but maybe that is just how kids' content works now and I am romanticizing the past.) I do not know how much of this is structural and how much is just my small sample size of one kid. Curious whether others are seeing the same at home. And genuinely curious what long-term $DIS bulls think about this.

@mitchmeyerr @DylanAbruscato @TheStalwart TBPN was known for critical discussions?

@DylanAbruscato @TheStalwart I just don’t understand this. A tech / business show being owned by OpenAi destroys the ability to have the critical discussions that makes the show special. This sucks

OpenAI is acquiring TBPN This has been a dream job and the show only gets better from here

@atelicinvest I sleep very well at night knowing that 83,000 Salesforce employees are literally only thinking about solving my problems.

Ok but counter 1000s people don't wake up every day literally only thinking about solving your problem And it doesn't just work.

@dalibali2 @carrynointerest 'Disappearing' a lot of cash!

@carrynointerest Temporary? I think they been torching a lot of cash pretty consistently 😂

WATCH ME CRITIQUE THIS HEDGE FUND'S SNAPCHAT THESIS: Irenic capital decided to publish an activist campaign on snapchat. I think it is warranted, but unfortunately their logic is a bit flawed. They make some good points, but make a few very bad assumptions that I think deserve critique. Let's get into it: 1) The entire monetization thesis is built on a fundamentally flawed comparison Irenic's core argument is "SNAP monetizes at $13 ARPDAU vs Meta at $57, close the gap, 7x the stock." Sounds great on a slide. But ARPDAU as a standalone metric is WILDLY misleading here because it completely ignores time spent per user. Think about what's actually happening. Meta's family of apps (Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, Messenger) is generating 60-90+ minutes of daily usage per user across those surfaces. Snapchat gets ~30 minutes. So when you normalize for actual attention, the monetization gap shrinks dramatically. Meta isn't just "better at ads." They have 2-3x more user attention to sell per DAU. That's a structurally different business, not a fixable product gap. And here's the sneaky part: Irenic actually HAS the time-spent data on their own slide 57. They show SNAP at ~30 min and Meta at ~33 min. But Meta's number is almost certainly per-app, not per-user-across-the-family. A person who spends 25 minutes on Instagram AND 20 minutes on Facebook is counted as one DAU but generating 45 minutes of monetizable attention. SNAP doesn't have that luxury. One app. One surface. The comparison as presented is misleading. 2) Not all time spent is created equal. Not all users are created equal. This is the part nobody wants to say out loud but it's the elephant in the room. Irenic loves to flex that SNAP reaches "75% of 13-34 year olds in 20+ countries" like that's an unambiguous positive. But think about what that actually means from an advertiser's perspective. A 15 year old on Snapchat sending disappearing selfies to their friends has FUNDAMENTALLY different purchasing power than a 38 year old scrolling Instagram who just liked three posts from a furniture brand and sent a Reel of a kitchen renovation to their spouse. The CPMs an advertiser will pay for those two eyeballs are not even in the same universe. One of them has a credit card and a mortgage and disposable income. The other one is asking their parents for money. Irenic presents the young demographic as this incredible asset. And in some ways it is for brand awareness. But brand awareness campaigns pay garbage CPMs compared to direct response and conversion campaigns. The advertisers paying $50+ CPMs on Meta are doing it because they can TARGET a 32 year old woman in Denver who just searched for running shoes, liked three Nike posts, and sent her friend a link to a shoe review. That user is worth 10x what a 16 year old on Snapchat is worth to an advertiser, and no amount of AI tooling changes that. Meta's ARPDAU is higher in large part because Meta's users are WORTH MORE to advertisers on a per-impression basis. The demographic skew isn't a bug for SNAP, it's literally the product. But it puts a hard ceiling on monetization that Irenic completely ignores. 3) The targeting gap is STRUCTURAL, not a product execution problem. And it's permanent. This is the part that really bothers me. Irenic frames the ROAS gap (Meta 7x vs SNAP 2.3x) as basically "SNAP just needs better tooling." As if you can close a 3x gap in ad returns by shipping a better campaign manager UI. No. Meta's targeting advantage comes from the DEPTH and RICHNESS of its signal graph. And this isn't just "Meta has more data." It's that Meta's products are DESIGNED in ways that generate commercially valuable signals by default, and Snapchat's products are designed in ways that structurally prevent this. Let me be specific: On Meta's platforms, users FOLLOW brands and creator accounts. That's an explicit interest signal. Users LIKE posts, which trains the algorithm on preferences. Users SHARE and SEND content to friends, which shows intent and social proof. Users COMMENT on products, which is direct sentiment data. Users click through to shopping pages from Instagram, creating conversion data. The Meta Pixel sits on millions of websites feeding purchase behavior back into the targeting system. Users have detailed profiles with relationship status, employer, education, location. Facebook Groups tell Meta exactly what communities and interests people belong to. Instagram Shopping creates a direct closed-loop between ad impression and purchase. Every single one of these interactions creates a commercially valuable data point that makes the next ad more targeted, which drives higher ROAS, which makes advertisers spend more, which generates more data. It's a flywheel. Now look at Snapchat. The core product is ephemeral messaging between friends. Snaps DISAPPEAR. Chats are encrypted. There are no public profiles to follow in any meaningful commercial sense. There's no like button generating preference data on content. There's no share/repost mechanic creating social proof signals. There's no shopping integration creating closed-loop conversion data. The 40x daily opens stat sounds impressive on a slide but most of those opens are to check messages from friends. That generates almost ZERO commercial intent signal. This isn't a matter of SNAP shipping better tools. The product architecture itself generates less commercially useful data per user. You can't "AI" your way out of a structural signal quality disadvantage. Snapchat was built for private, ephemeral communication between close friends. That's what makes it special. But it's also precisely why it will never generate the kind of rich behavioral and interest data that Meta's products generate by design. Better ad tech helps at the margin, sure. But the gap exists because of what the product IS, not because the engineering team hasn't shipped Advantage+ yet. I think Irenic raises some great points about SBC, operating expenses vs twitter (which I could also critique) and governance. But the problems with comparing meta to snapchat run much deeper than how much stock you give employees.

@GuyImpatient Knew the stock was broken, looks like the business model was also broken. That said.. it's kinda entertaining.

@WeatherPundit It's not a huge position for me but I have been slowly adding on the way down. The RuPaul match game seems like it's doing quite well also.

Took a stake in $eagr.to. They make the games you play when you poop. They are trading for $28m cad, for that you get +70m of revenue and $4m in cash from operations plus $4m in the bank with no debt. Big inside ownership and a buyback in place.

@P_Remarks Customer: “I don't disagree. But I still don’t understand why you’re building DAP.”