myrphy

I was telling my cousin earlier today: "The only right answer is always to add to $ASTS. That is the correct answer for at least the next 2 years. There is no other answer that is more likely to work than this one, just need to be patient." And its true.

@spacanpanman @Defiantclient2 @ASTS_Investors .

@Defiantclient2 @ASTS_Investors True

$ASTS: Daniel Thomas, Head of Sales & Commercial @ AST SpaceMobile's Satellite Connect Europe JV stated that they'll be adding more MNOs in the weeks ahead I predict that Deutsche Telekom, T-Mobile's parent, will join

Bill Clinton: “The Palestinians were offered a state. They refused. A state wasn't their goal. Killing Jews was." This must be shared every single day.

$ASTS: The investment thesis behind AST SpaceMobile just went interstellar 🚀 Today's MNO JV announcement is an absolute game changer and watershed moment for the wireless industry with AST SpaceMobile the tip of the spear for disruption serving AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile.

Bingo.

$ASTS: President Trump filed a new Periodic Transaction Report today disclosing 2 separate purchases of AST SpaceMobile (ASTS) in amounts between $1,001-$15,000 in March 17th. Hopefully this is the start of many more future purchases.

you shouldnt complain about a pre-revenue company making.... no revenue. Think of ASTS like a dam that's been under construction for 7 years, and need around one more year until completion. However, they already have tons of customers waiting for the dam to start generating electricity for them to buy. So many customers that the demand is oversubscribed. All it takes is completion of the dam. How do you value such a thing that is about to print revenue overnight once it's ready to go? Should you value it based on "no revenue for the last 7 years during construction"? Definitely not. It's about future cash flows. Discounting those cash flows is how you get to a valuation today. AST has both commercial as well as government revenues all lined up. In fact they are about to print 50 to 75M revenue in 2H 2025 with just their 6 test satellites in orbit, not even their actual next-gen constellation. As for how much revenue to expect? You can run all sorts of numbers on your own. It'll be far more than $1B per year.

One of you DMed me asking: if $ASTS is such a generational wealth stock, why are bears shorting it to the highest levels? Great question. Let me clarify how I think about this. Imagine a skyscraper being built in Manhattan. Foundation is poured. Steel is going up. 60 tenants have signed leases. Grand opening is scheduled for June. A bear walks by, sees no tenants inside, and says: "This building has no rental income. It's worthless. I'm betting it fails." That's what's happening with $ASTS right now. Bears see $14.7M in quarterly revenue on a $27B company and short it. They're pricing a construction site like a finished building. Meanwhile: 33 satellites in production. 60 carriers signed. $75-100M in contracted backlog. Launch in June. FCC approved. 98.9 Mbps proven. The building isn't empty. It's just not finished yet. Get it? Now -- about that short volume chart. First thing to understand: short VOLUME ≠ short INTEREST. Short volume is daily flow. Short interest is total position. Big difference. Think of it like a grocery store. Short volume is how many people walked through the door today. Short interest is how many people are still standing inside. A huge chunk of daily short volume is market makers. When you hit "buy," a market maker sells short to fill your order, then covers seconds later. They're the cashier making change -- the money comes right back. It looks like selling. It's actually them helping YOU buy. But the real short adding IS happening. Here's why: Reason 1: Revenue miss gave them confidence. $14.7M vs $36.6M expected. They see "miss by 60%" and double down. They didn't read the business update. Reason 2: Convertible bond hedging. Funds buy $ASTS convertible bonds and automatically short the stock as a math hedge. Not a bet against ASTS. These shorts won't cover for years regardless of news. Reason 3: They think the valuation is unsustainable. $27B market cap on $14.7M revenue. Some shorts only see that ratio. What they're missing: The building took a bad inspection report and held its value. Stock didn't crash to $50 on a 60% miss. It held $70+. That means buyers are absorbing every share shorts are selling. Guidance reaffirmed: $150-200M. Half already under contract. 45 satellites targeted. Three new government contracts. Mid-June launch on Falcon 9. Why this pattern matters: Shorts are always most aggressive right before they're wrong. Tesla 2019: bears shorted it every day while the China factory was being built. "No profit, overvalued." They kept adding. Then it went from $40 to $400 in 12 months. They were shorting the construction site. The building opened anyway. $ASTS 🛰️

$ASTS Same.

@spacanpanman I still think we are up 10%+ today, the market is slow at figuring things out.

$ASTS: If the market fully understood what just happened today, we would be trading at $100.

A small group of industry analysts including myself were pre-briefed on this very unconventional joint venture between @ATT, @TMobile and @Verizon. Eliminating dead zones is a noble endeavor to bridge the digital divide and to support first responders. I also like the potential to accelerate the deployment and scale of non-terrestrial networks utilizing low earth orbit satellite connectivity. However, I also view this alliance as a defensive move to mitigate the impact of any NTN service provider that might wish to more directly compete with mobile network operators. It's yet another interesting development in the race to space connectivity 🚀🛰️ ⬇️

@Reformed_Trader x.com/philliplyle410… How can one even call themselves a D2D Enthusiast and never even attempt to use the D2D service, that was readily available as a beta test, is laughable.

$ASTS shorts doing everything possible to paint today's news as bad. They are digging their own graves

@disgusting_pleb 🎯

@myrphy I agree. Low IQ individuals can more easily understand the investment. My friend jokingly said the other day it’s because idiots just like the name “rocket lab” more than “AST” LOL

When $ASTS was at ATH, I don't recall any spacemob posting about how $ASTS is a better company than $RKLB, or that they are "winning the contest"... The fuck is wrong with $RKLB investors? I'm also a rocket lab investor btw, but jesus fucking christ

@WouldEWood @gravis821 @grok @Milo_Trades @CulperResearch I would love to know how they managed their APP short, and when they stopped out of their IREN short.. seems like they know what they are doing otherwise.

@gravis821 @grok @Milo_Trades @myrphy @CulperResearch Average is -7% from report date, and -24% relative to their respective market indices since report date. Not bad

NEW: We are short Nvidia $NVDA. We believe Nvidia has a significant China problem. Please see our full report and disclosures now available on our website, link in bio.

$AUR Is it really worth the risk and headache just to save a “measly” 15 cents per mile? Let’s pull out the calculator: Using Hirschbach Motor Lines and their non-binding MOU for 500 Aurora Driver-powered trucks (deliveries starting 2027, DaaS subscription) as a real-world example: - Industry-standard human-driven long-haul truck (U.S. average per ATRI and carrier data): ~100,000–125,000 miles per year (limited by federal Hours-of-Service rules, mandatory rest, driver shortages, and turnover). - Aurora autonomous truck: 250,000+ miles per year (continuous 24/7 operation on approved Sun Belt corridors, no HOS restrictions, and a perfect safety and on-time record to date). For a fleet of 500 trucks – two realistic utilization scenarios per Aurora’s guidance: • Conservative scenario (half utilization: ~125,000 miles/truck/year): Total fleet miles: 62.5 million Direct driver-cost savings alone (Aurora DaaS at ~$0.85/mile vs. ~$1.00/mile human compensation per ATRI 2025): $0.15 × 62.5M miles = ~$9.375 million per year • Full-capacity scenario (250,000 miles/truck/year): Total fleet miles: 125 million Direct driver-cost savings alone: $0.15 × 125M miles = ~$18.75 million per year At Hirschbach’s full current fleet scale (~3,000 trucks): • Conservative scenario: ~375 million miles annually → ~$56.25 million per year in direct driver-cost savings. • Full-capacity scenario: ~750 million miles annually → ~$112.5 million per year in direct driver-cost savings. Even in the conservative case, the fleet matches or exceeds human output while delivering pure cost savings. At full capacity it nearly doubles productive miles with the same 500 trucks, unlocking major additional revenue from higher freight volume. This $0.15/mile figure is the direct savings only (the gap between Aurora’s DaaS pricing and typical human driver wages + benefits). It does not include Aurora’s estimated additional ~$0.15/mile in indirect driver-management savings (sourcing, turnover, training, workers’ comp, and administrative overhead), nor other operational upsides such as potential fuel-efficiency gains or lower insurance premiums from improved safety. KNOW WHAT YOU OWN

@grok @CulperResearch What were the prices of the names you mentioned at the time of the short report release?

@myrphy @CulperResearch Culper Research has issued short reports on ADMA Biologics ($ADMA), NexGen Energy ($NXE), T1 Energy ($TE), Archer Aviation ($ACHR), AppLovin ($APP), and BitMine Immersion ($BMNR) tied to ETH, among others. Their reports and disclosures are on culperresearch.com.

@Investinc_Intel “The way to get started is to quit talking and begin doing.” - Walt Disney

@myrphy I have been wanting to dig deeper into $ASTS

I am 24 years old and this is my portfolio: $HIMS 500 shares $ZETA 500 shares $SOFI 400 shares $IREN 100 shares $ROOT 11 shares What would you change about my portfolio?

$VELO Say hello to my little friend.