Jon Hook

@jsm2334 @SunstrumPaul @ChildrensHD He's saying "prove" since the CDC said definitively that vaccines do not cause autism. In this case "prove" could at least have been supported by *some* studies suggesting it, even if not "proving" it. His point is they couldn't even show that, in fact if anything the opposite.

@SunstrumPaul @ChildrensHD $0

Aaron Siri sued the CDC with one simple demand: Show us the studies that allegedly prove vaccines do not cause autism. Their answer will shock you: “40 to 70% of parents who have a child with autism report that they believe vaccines cause their child’s autism.” “When you ask them what vaccines you think cause your child’s autism, they’ll say the vaccines given in the first six months of life.” “On behalf of ICANN … we sent a Freedom of Information Act request, FOIA request to the CDC.” “We said, your website says vaccines do not cause autism. Please give us the studies that show that Hep B vaccines given three times in the first six months of life do not cause autism.” “Please give us the studies that show that DTaP vaccine given three times in the first six months of life do not cause autism.” “Same thing for IPV vaccine, for PCV vaccine, and for HIV vaccine.” “Each one of those vaccines is given three times each in the first six months of life. 15 injections.” “They never gave us the studies.” “I sued them in the Southern District of New York.” “Days before the hearing, I get a list of 20 studies, finally, from the DOJ, because they represent the CDC.” “19 of them have nothing to do with the vaccines given in the first six months of life.” “They were all either MMR studies or studies of an ingredient that wasn’t in those vaccines.” “One of them was an Institute of Medicine [study] from 2012 that canvassed all the literature on whether DTaP vaccine does or does not cause autism.” “The Institute of Medicine … said, we can only find one study on DTaP and autism.” “And in fact it showed an association between [the] DTaP vaccine and autism.” “But the IOM threw it out because they said there’s no unvaccinated control in it.” “When their back was to the wall, they had nothing.” “There are no studies.” “They could not produce one that showed the vaccines given in the first six months of life do not cause autism.” “Here’s the thing they left out: there is one study out there regarding Hep B vaccines and autism.” “It’s from Gallagher and Goodman out of the University of Stony Brook.” “And it showed that kids that got Hep B vaccine versus those that did in the first month of life had three times the rate of autism.” @joerogan @AaronSiriSG

@JaredSleeper Was it "investing" to see those same exact stocks drop 70% on no material sales/earnings revisions?

If you've gotten more bullish on SaaS stocks over the last week or so as share prices have increased, rather than less, you aren't an "investor" in the traditional sense at all- you're reasoning from price changes. Which is okay! But definitely worth being self-aware about.

@HedgeyeComm The stock is down over 50% y/y with 2026 revenue and EBITDA estimates up over that same time.

lol watch $GTLB miss, guide below and the stock gap up 15%…. Why? Because nothing matters.

@greenleafcapm @AggieCapitalist Fair. Just saying based on that comp $eeft looks very cheap at around 6.5x EPS

@jonrice80 @AggieCapitalist I’m not commenting on $EEFT Just saying the multiple paid for Atleos feels appropriate for the business profile

An ATM co getting acquired at 8x EBITDA, 2x the multiple of $EEFT (which has compounded EPS on par with MSFT, is more digital and has proprietary global rails to billions of accounts)

@greenleafcapm @AggieCapitalist You realize $EEFT's ATMaaS business is widely thought to be their worst business, right? And they don't even sell the ATMs like Atleos does.

@AggieCapitalist NCR Atleos’s ATMaaS push had some real growth, was very real margin opportunity from mix shift going on. 8x felt about right for them imo, but could see the argument for 6 or 7. Great outcome regardless, Tim Oliver is such a killer, one of the best CEO’s out there

@jake_ayes @Sunny_and_72 A startup already valued at $10 billion.

@Sunny_and_72 $40B business vs a startup…

notable CRM added more Agentforce NNARR in 4Q than Sierra has ARR not a defense of CRM but... hmm

@brexton There are already hundreds of free CRMs with no noticeable effect on margins. There are already "free" open source versions of all kinds of software. This argument in of itself simply doesn't hold up under basic scrutiny.

Yes 10000x. This is the best take on SaaS-pocalypse I’ve seen so far “The real threat to SaaS was never demand destruction. It’s supply explosion.”

@TomSmith839 You mean $500, not $500k.right?

$EEFT in Q425 call on Crediabank deal in the 'few millions of dollars rather than hundreds of millions of dollars', so let's assume $10m (in contrast to my estimate of $40m) ? Would be CAC of $500k per merchant

@malinvested @HedgeyeComm The thing I struggle with is the shift down clearly *started* in early 2025, so to now attribute everything to AI doesn't quite make sense to me, but I admit the guidance implies a further downshift (in total ARR) so it will hard for the company to get away from the narrative.

@HedgeyeComm @jonrice80 yeah, I mean I think the SERP changes are obviously contributing. countless studies on this impact in many categories outside of just productivity & that alone would limit supply & drive up keyword pricing but ofc you’re right as well, demand could also be a factor

Did you listen to the call and look at the customer growth and ARR trends by cohort/size?

@HedgeyeComm I did, I should have phrased my comment on S&M more clearly...they've talked about SEO issues a few quarters now. I'm saying there are other explanations beyond people vibe coding. I agree pulling 2027 guidance is a huge no-no, combined with lower FCF margins. Thanks for this!

@jonrice80 Listen. To. The. Call.

@HedgeyeComm I think what you're saying is possible, it's just not as obvious as you say. To really know we'd have to look at S and M efficiency by cohort. By your own table you could have said they were getting disrupted two years ago as a much smaller company, pre-enterprise push.

That is not this... and both are slowing rapidly. Listen to the conference call. They wouldn't have given 2027 guidance in September 2025, and then pulled it 5 months later if the business was performing in-line with their expectations and if this was all part of "strategic graduation".

@HedgeyeComm OK, that's fair, and thank you for showing that. The obvious counter to this is that their stated strategy for the last two years has been to move customers out of the smallest bucket and into the larger buckets. So how are you attributing AI disruption vs strategic graduation?

@jonrice80 It's just weird... because I am telling you exactly the metric to calculate, how to do it and where to find it... and you keep showing me other non-related metrics... Here you go...

@HedgeyeComm I just showed you two angles to look at it from, you said "not that's not the right way to look at it." Here's another. Maybe give me a hint? Seems like something so clear and obvious shoudl be more...clear and obvious?

@jonrice80 Show me how you sliced it... and what is the "modest" deceleration. Or do you need me to do the work for you?

@HedgeyeComm I'm seeing modest deceleration no matter how you slice it. If you're willing to show me the "killer data point" I'm willing to say I was wrong, but I grow tired of these overly confident proclamations without any data to back it up.

@jonrice80 You have to calculate the ARR and customer growth rates by customer size and ARR under $50k from the disclosures in earnings presentation. YoY % growth rates < customers over 10 users and under 10 users. And the different ARR segments.

@HedgeyeComm Like unless I'm misreading, they added way more customers sequentially this quarter than they did last year. Is this a great trend? No, but it doesn't scream disruption.

@HedgeyeComm Can you humor my idiocy and show me one example of what you're talking about? It must be pretty obvious if it's "clear disruption", right?

@HedgeyeComm Which cohort data do you think suggested the clear disruption? We don't even own this name, it just seems like hysteria when compared to the actual data.

@HedgeyeComm Yes, very modest deceleration across all those things. Not sure it screams "clear disruption".

@HedgeyeComm I'm genuninely curiuos, what data point beyond "stock price" do you think shows "very clear" "disruption" for $MNDY?

$MNDY $UPWK... very clear that the low end of the market is seeing the most disruption related to AI and Claude/ChatGPT/Gemini... Which is exactly where you would expect it to start...

@KairosPraxis @CCM_Brett They have 45% of their market cap in net cash.

@CCM_Brett Was just thinking about this for $MNDY. Stock is so cheap right now and they seem to generate a decent amount of FCF

If a company is going to have to climb the wall of worrry (re: AI and software) it is ideal if they have a bunch of cash to pound the buyback If not, the drawdown is just unhelpful pain for everybody