Hamid

@adenois Sometimes the market tries to give you a gift.

@hamids You and me. I have my original shares at $70 cost basis and ignored your earlier posts about adding in the high $200s (?). Have been swing trading between $370 and $420. After the earnings, I had to buy as much as I could. Added 300 shares.

After the absolutely INSANE Q2 beat by $MU, the raise in Q3 guidance and outlook, combined with the market's truly retarded reaction, I had to buy even more Micron! Micron just became the largest investment I have ever made into a single company, surpassing my investment in $RIVN today.

@EthanPh @dkhos The investment is separate from the car purchase.

@hamids @dkhos 950m for 40k cars is $23k per car..

If you've been following me for a while, you probably know I used to own $UBER shares and I was urging @dkhos (CEO of Uber) to buy $RIVN and accelerate its own plans for autonomy and control the full stack (from vehicle manufacturing to ride-sharing). This partnership announcement is NOT that. It's good for $RIVN, but it's only ok for $UBER. Here's a quick summary and my thoughts: * Rivian immediately gets $300 Million from the deal. Good for Rivian. * If Rivian achieves autonomy by 2028, Uber or its partners are committed to buying 10,000 R2 vehicles. Assuming a $50K price point, that's ~$500 Million in vehicle sales by 2028. This is the part that's ok for Uber. More on this below. * If various other undisclosed milestones are hit, Uber will invest another $950 Million in Rivian and buy up to another 40,000 R2 vehicles through 2031. So who is this deal good for? From Rivian's Perspective: The extra cash, guaranteed vehicle sales and additional motivation to solve autonomy is great! Unless there are non-compete clauses in this agreement that prevent Rivian from operating its own ride-sharing business, which is doubtful but possible, there is no downside for Rivian. It gets some needed cash, more demand for R2 and more motivation to get autonomy solved! From Uber's Perspective: Uber has bet the future of autonomy on the multi-partner strategy where it counts on potentially dozens of autonomy partners to compete with each other to create the best autonomy service and drive costs down as much as possible. Partnering with Rivian and helping them achieve L4 Autonomy just adds another partner to the mix, which should help drive costs down long-term. My View: Uber's strategy is flawed. @travisk (Uber Founder) understood that he needed to own the full stack, which is why Uber under Travis was building its own autonomy tech. Dara cancelled Uber's autonomy group to cut costs when he focused Uber on profitability. Probably a great decision at the time. However, fundamentally, in my opinion, Uber needs to own both the autonomy tech AND the manufacturing of vehicles in order to control its destiny and be able to compete with $TSLA. Otherwise, the company that can iterate through vehicle design, AI hardware and software, the fastest for the lowest cost, will eventually win. Right now, Tesla is the only company in that game. Rivian can also enter the game in the future.

Today, @wholemars has posted around 12 times about Rivian, with every post 💩ing on $RIVN and the $UBER deal (not counting replies). But don't worry guys, he actually *really likes* Rivian! 🤣

@Deenobrown123 🤣💯

But it’s cyclical Hamid. Everyone knows cyclical money is bad money. who cares if they make $230 billion dollars from now until 2029! That cyclical money is garbage! You need that hopium money. That stuff is way better. You know, that stuff PLTR and TSLA got. That money they may get one day if everything works out the way they tell their investors it will work out. Forgot about the actual cyclical money that Micron actually makes! Hopium money is the best!

$MU's revenue growth + the management's guide for next quarter in RED. No joke! It's literally off the charts!

🤯

@Deenobrown123 Absolutely amazing!

@hamids Micron will make about as much money next quarter as AMD, TSLA, and PLTR will make combined in all of 2026! 3 Combined companies yearly earnings compared to one company for one quarter trading at 1/4 the valuation of those combined companies! Insane

Agreed on 1 and 3. On 2...Tesla hit the reset button on Autonomy 3 years ago and started from scratch. They do have a larger fleet, so that's an advantage, but disadvantage is lack of high-resolution cameras and no lidar. AI training costs have been dropping rapidly too...so 2nd player, especially one that has a rapidly growing fleet, like Rivian, with better sensors, might not be more than 1-2 years behind.

Great description of the current state and potential future of autonomous competition. I’d just add a couple of points: 1- Tesla, Rivian, and Chinese manufacturers are the only ones providing a generalized autonomous solution that any vehicle owner can use anywhere. 2- If we assume Rivian’s development pace will be similar to Tesla’s, I’d say they’re about 4 years behind. If they partner with NVDA for the Alpamayo platform, they can cut it to 2 to 3 years. 3- If Chinese manufacturers are allowed to sell their vehicles and autonomous systems in the U.S., Rivian and Waymo won’t be 2nd and 3rd.

Key to understanding Autonomy/Robotaxis of the future. There are 3 KEY Components: #1 - Vehicle with Autonomy Hardware #2 - Autonomy Software (the brains) #3 - Ride-sharing network (the customers) The 3 parts above are considered "the full stack." $UBER has #3. It's partnering with everyone for #1 & #2. $GOOGL has #2 with Waymo and has slowly been building its own #3. It partners with Jaguar, Hundai and others for #1. It has also partnered with Uber to get more access to #3. $TSLA is building THE FULL STACK! They own #1, they're on the verge of having #2 and they are building #3, which if they can compete on price & safety, should be easy to build. This is why Tesla investors are super excited...because Tesla's full-stack strategy is similar to Apple's iPhone and will likely win out. $RIVN has #1 and is building its own #2 and has stayed silent on possibly building its own #3. It's at least 1 year, but realistically 2 years behind Tesla on #2. Despite Uber's current lead in ride-sharing, once autonomous vehicles enter the market, Uber's ride-sharing network is the easiest part of the stack to build from scratch. So if we fast-forward 5 years to 2031, here's how I see this playing out for autonomous ride-sharing: #1: Tesla #2: Waymo #3: Uber #4: Rivian But fast-forward 10 years to 2036, and I think this is the likely outcome: #1: Tesla #2: Rivian #3: Waymo #4: Nobody. In most markets there are 2 major winners, a distant 3rd, and a lot of companies that die.

No. But in the 1960s, as high-speed commercial jets became a thing, if Boeing was planning to launch its own airline, as Tesla is today, they would've had an unfair advantage and likely would've beat all the airlines. So in the 1960s, if you wanted to compete with Boeing, you'd have to own the full-stack. This is what's happening today...Tesla plans to own the full-stack. So if you want to compete with Tesla, you better hope you can optimize each of the 3 core stack components so you're not sharing profits with a bunch of other companies.

@hamids @dkhos Isn’t this a little like saying United or Delta should be in the plane manufacturing business?

Yes, building the ride-sharing app customers, is the easiest of the 3 things. Nobody other than $TSLA has #1 & #2. Not sure how you came to the conclusion that #1 and #2 are commodities. You could argue $RIVN has #1 and Waymo has #2. That's about it. Everybody else needs add-ons for #1. In a two-sided market, which is what $UBER plays in today, Uber has a MAJOR advantage and nobody else can compete anymore. This is a world where you need both drivers AND customers...without drivers, customers won't come, without customers, drivers won't come. So nobody can launch a 2-sided ride-sharing service and compete with Uber. However, in a 1-sided market, where a tech-provider floods a market with the drivers, all they need is the customers...and it's relatively easy to get customers because you can do that by: - Providing a lower-cost option - Providing a more-available option - Providing a safer option Or ideally, doing all 3. That's how Tesla plans to win. And they will.

You really think building out a demand aggregation business like Uber is the “easiest?” Using your conventions, #1 and #2 are commodities already. #3 is the only one with a moat because millions of people CHOOSE to interact with Uber everyday. That’s where the moats are on the internet.

Oh no! 😩 $MU

@ChiChi077 @dkhos Valuation matters. I think Tesla has a bright future, but too much optimism is built into its stock price, making it overvalued in my opinion.

@hamids @dkhos Bearish Tesla tho ……

@wholemars 🙄 Wish you weren't an EBot and chief $RIVN FUD creator. It's like you take the $TSLAQ FUD and regurgitate it as $RIVN FUD. What a waste of brain power! You're pretty smart guy Omar. You can do better.

Congrats to Uber, this is now yours for the low low price of just $1 billion

Storage on Cybertruck is awesome! The tonneau cover is amazing. In heavy rain, it'll have leakage on the edges, but it's a non-issue in my view. It's a giant storage space and because of the angle of the tonneau it's actually much more space than any other truck that also has a cover.

Thank you, I appreciate the feedback. Range is fine. I got used to it with the depletion drama. One doesn't get everything right. I don't tow, so I'm fine—only my baby car seat if he's not there😅. Also, how does the storage work? I know it's a stupid question, but is the trunk really that spacious? And does it leak in the rain? Very stupid question😇. Also, seats—like for long drives—how is the back support? On Rivian I loved it, not gonna lie, it kept my back so good and firm. Does the Cybertruck have the same support? THANK YOU AND HOPE I'M NOT TAKING MUCH OF YOUR TIME. BYD—just for fun—yeah, they're gonna have a hard time, especially in this term. I'm a bag holder on Lucid. Yeah, they'll be a casualty 🤣🤣 I am also thinking that, but with PIF funds they're not going to give up, and with their Uber tie-ups they also have some promise. Anyway lets see how they execute.

Just think about it like this: If Waymo decided to drop Uber in SF and go at it alone, who fairs better? Waymo or Uber? Waymo has its own app and is already in the drivers seat. It's in far better shape! That's a lopsided partnership. Eventually that partnership will die and it will be too late for Uber to fix.

Not saying that they are not competitors. For some companies they will be both partners and competitors simultaneously similar to why Amazon’s Zoox partners and competes with $UBER in vegas. I’m just saying that if they kept their AV divison, there wouldn’t be a partnership at all. Waymo is a good case study for SF because they pretty much saturated the city at this point is arguably doing very well. What does the data show? $UBER’s gross bookings accelerated the fastest in the country in SF and similar markets where AVs are present. This is taking into consideration that there are 0 Uber robotaxi in SF. The data shows that AVs expand the total economic pie for ride hailing. The situation isn’t as black and white as most think. This isn’t my opinion either, it’s a data driven fact that management already revealed in the last earnings call.

Thank you! BYD: Maybe in China and other places. I don't think they'll be allowed to operate in the US. Lucid is a distant 4th - probably will be one of the casualties. Cybertruck: you'll love it! It's an awesome vehicle. FSD on it is fantastic! My only gripe is with range, which diminishes quickly when towing and there are no pull-through superchargers.

#4 BYD or LUCID. 😅 You are very balanced when analyzing Rivian, and I love that about you. You argue the good and the bad while being realistic about its growth not just hyping it . Appreciate and respect that about you. Also, I’m so leaning toward the Cybertruck. I still need to learn about some experiences from people who use it. Have to ask people around it. I just cannot drive without FSD right now, and FSD has been like medical care for me in a way—big impact on me and my family life.

@mehauff7 The more vendors/partners that have to make a profit, the higher the cost of that particular path. Which means if you can do all 3 things in-house, you have an unfair advantage.

Waymo is proving they can adapt their system to any platform or manufacturer. IF taxis are the future (far from proven), Waymo can easily sell the system to any manufacturer. The likes of Hertz, Enterprise, etc will buy a fleet and list on Uber or go it alone. Meanwhile consumers enjoy cheap rides as competition crush margins.

@jefferinc @dkhos That's why they'll be #1, assuming they'll be just-as-safe, which might not end up being the case. We'll see.

@hamids @dkhos It will be costs related. You cannot compete with a cybercab for 25k. With a 50k car.