Buying $VEEV here. Simple thesis: sold off baby with SaaS bathwater. I don't see AI as a threat in regulated industry, nor with customers w/ zero software creation proficiency. Rather, more AI = more molecules = more usage. If/when that theme hits, should benefit.

My biggest position is ZQ futures, betting the year end interest rate will be lower than market has priced... primarily on the thesis that inflation is well under control and labor market will tighten from AI and general lack of growth. It's been a wild ride lately. I've taken a beating from the Iran conflict which has stoked fears of rising energy prices, and thus inflation. It's been brutal. Today's NFP report -- showing significant negative revisions to Dec/Jan, as well as pretty bad results for Feb -- would've netted me an ungodly amount of money, were it not for the Iran conflict. The fact ZQ futures are up significantly today, even though oil is up 12%, speaks to how significant the NFP report appears to be. Now, my position hinges on an insanely complex probability tree of outcomes and timings of a far away conflict. I'm finding it nearly impossible to get a grasp on the "real" goings on because of the insanely shitty signal to noise ratio. Even if I had full information, it's unlikely that any outcome could be predicted with confidence. Still, aside from selling vol, this is probably the biggest TACO trade available... an end to the conflict would assuage inflation concerns and the (interest rate) market could once again focus on Fed's job mandate. My position now hinges on what is the most "win-win" outcome for all parties involved, and hoping rational minds prevail. Mid-terms are this year, Trump/GOP do not want inflation blamed on them. If this stretches on, it will surely be unpopular. There's also the fact that an end to the conflict can be front-run by cronies... the more punishment the market takes, the more upside there is to resolving it. All things being equal, the ability to make nearly infinite amount of money front-running a resolution tilts things in that favor. Geopolitically, there's also the fact that an economic disruption to energy does nobody any good. I think we're back to BAU in a couple of months. Either we "seize nuclear materials" or install/approve a "fine for now but will end up being hardliner" leadership. Trump hasn't really taken his "I won't budge" stance for longer than a month. I'm hoping this will be no different. All in all... really sucks that my thesis would've been proven correct, but instead my portfolio is dragged into this conflict. Could've gone long oil to hedge, I suppose. I did that one day one and that's paid off well, but what I really needed was like Jun OTM calls on oil. Should've just paid for insurance via 0.2 delta calls that I roll. Live and learn.

Hey FinX & everyone waiting on Situational Awareness 13F to drop tomorrow I bought $IREN over 12 months before Leopold + $BE over 6m before L + $COHR 4m before L I'm 99.999% confident Leopold will invest in my largest position before this yr is over, hopefully he announces tmrw

I understand your skepticism, but I think you're being overly cynical. I understand it's what gets clicks.. but it's not intellectually honest. Building out DC's is not quantum physics. It's mainly just expensive. And, frankly, your criticisms of $CORZ make me embarrassed for you. - They went bankrupt. Correct. So what? They emerged and have found value in leasing their digital infrastructure, rather than mining BTC. They are well-capitalized and their expenses are pretty slim. You continually complain about overinvestment into AI... but in this case, $CORZ is a beneficiary of that! - $CORZ is not taking on the CapEx burden. You continually get the terms of the contract wrong, so I'll state it plainly: $CRWV is paying $5m-$8m/MW to upgrade $CORZ's datacenters. In return, $CORZ extends a 50% reduction in lease costs over the first 2 years, effectively "paying back" $1.5m/MW to $CRWV. - How is it unclear how $CORZ intends to fund this? They spend $1, then $CRWV pays them back $1. It says it right there -- they're getting reimbursed $900m on the $1.14b of committed CapEx spend. (The other ~$224m of CapEx commitments is likely related to $CORZ's own BTC mining business.. mainly 15 EH/s of ASICs). Do you honestly think they'll spent $1.14b in one lump sum on a massive multi-phase project? Please tell me you have more of a clue than that. They have $800m in the bank and are (marginally) cashflow positive from mining. They likely won't even need a line of credit. - I suggest you take a look at the $CORZ staff. They are vastly different than they were a year ago. Well suited and experienced to build out a DC. Notwithstanding, it's not quantum physics to build out an AI datacenter. There's an entire industry surrounding this stuff, and the whole AI boat is contingent on customer success. - And, yes, $CRWV is placing a lot of faith in $CORZ's ability to build out datacenters. I really don't know why you think this is some impossible task, or why $CRWV would risk their entire business without having done due diligence. Building DCs is not an unsolved problem, it's just expensive, and it requires access to suitable MWs. It is 100% a problem that money can solve... and you keep harping on about how everybody is spending so much money -- so why doubt that DCs will be built? Literally everyone involved is incentivized to do this correctly. $NVDA sells GPUs, they need people to be able to use them. Their ~$3T valuation is on the line. Don't you think they'd enable customer success? Are you aware of the design specifications they provide, preferred partners, etc? $CRWV sells GPU-hrs, they need a place to host them. Their entire growth story is on the line. Do you think they'd sign agreements without proper planning and feasibility? $CORZ will make bank from hosting the GPUs. Do you think they won't deliver on a contract that will net them billions in profit? Seriously, try to taper your cynicism a bit and you might be able to see some things more clearly. Clickbait wise, there is far more meat on the bone of "will $CRWV get a positive ROI on the GPUs they keep buying" than "can $CORZ build a datacenter".. so maybe just stick to that.

$MARA - My thoughts pre-Q1 results, and what questions I'd ask them. Bluntly, this quarter will be a disaster. They'll have mined at very thin gross margins (unprofitably for hosted), and burnt a chunk of cash. Narrative will 100% be on AI/HPC prospects, though they really should provide some answers as to wtf they are going to do with the awful mining business. Just some bulleted thoughts on mining: * For context, Q1 averaged a hashprice of ~$34.30 * MARAPOOL seems to have mined at ~51 EH/s. This produced ~2,060 BTC, or ~$157m in revenue. Generally they have a little bit more BTC/revenue from non-MARAPOOL.. I'm guessing they'll print ~$165m in revenue. Below consensus, apparently. * As for gross costs, 51 EH/s is about the same as Q4, in which they spent ~$158m on cost of revenue. So hardly any gross margin... * ...On top of CoR, there are massive cash expenses. SG&A (-$55m in Q4) and R&D (-$4m in Q4) and "other" (-$24m in Q4, though it fluctuates Q to Q).. that's a lot of overhead cash burn to support mining BTC at thin gross margins. (Generally, hashprice trends downward...) * Self-owned mining: in Q4 cost of revenue alone was $31.57 as hashcost. Compare to Q1 average of $34.30 and that's not much margin. * Hosted mining: In Q4 this costed $36.20 in hashcost, which is less than hashprice was in Q1. So if they kept hosted hashrate on, they'd have burnt money in Q1. And it appears they had the same total hashrate as in Q4, so it appears likely they kept it all on. Why? * Bottom line: Revenue of $165m, minus roughly same costs as Q4, and you land at $50m of cash burn, plus whatever they spent on R&D ($4m?) and "other" ($10m?) * That's a lot of cash to be burning after having sold a ton of BTC, having huge debt coming due, halving in two years (ffs just quit mining at that point), etc. * AI/HPC is figuratively a life raft for them, and it could very well be an entire ship. Insane to me Fred was poo-poo'ing this for so long and insisted $MARA was a competitive miner. ----------------- So that's the bottom line stuff. Next part is just a curiosity about their self-defined "cost per petahash per day", as they call it in their filings. (aka, hashcost) Firstly, the term makes no sense. $MARA produces something like 73,000,000 Petahashes per day. If they were paying ~$30 for each one they'd be bankrupt in a week. I believe they mean "cost per petahash per second per day" which is the same units as hashcost. But, whatever... tomato tomato right? At any rate, I believe they are fluffing hashcost downward intentionally, by using inflated hashrate numbers in the denominator. If they aren't, then they really need to clearly describe what "daily average operational hashrate online during the period" means... because the hashrate they divide the costs by is: 1) Very significantly higher than what one would expect, given the amount of BTC they produce. It's nearly impossible to produce such few BTC if hashing at that rate. (You can claim pool luck all you want.. there's math to show how unlikely it is and the inflating is egregious.) 2) In Q4 periods (where it takes more effort to back out the "online hashrate" number) it is somehow a nice, round number. Coincidence, I guess? My guess is they are including hashrate that is not actually hashing... which is bullshit, given the whole point of "hashcost" is to determine the cost of producing hashes... not having hashrate "online" and not hashing. It's even more confusing in the context of "energized hashrate" being a term they use. Apparently there is "energized hashrate" that is not "online hashrate". Then there is "online hashrate" that is not hashing, and that's what they divide costs by. ------------------ Questions for the earnings call * Most important: Regarding the Starwood agreement... exactly how much is each of $MARA's assets worth when folding them into a JV? Eg, if the JV is valued at $5b, and $MARA is pitching in 500MW of assets, how much equity would that get them? * How will $MARA fund additional JV equity buy in, to get to 50% * How will the JV's earnings appear in future earnings reports? I expect it to be non-consolidated.. meaning we're left with a terrible cash-burning mining business, then some sort of line-item that is the JV's GAAP income. So we don't even get clarity into the rev/cost/margins of the JV... it's just a "trust us bro" situation for what is realistically the only upside of the company. * Referring to the hashrate used in your "cost per petahash per day" calculation: I notice it is not producing as much BTC as what a 3rd party mining pool would. Is there a reason for this discrepancy and/or what does "online hashrate" mean? Is there room for improvement here? * Regarding hosted mining: It appears that in Q1 the average hashprice was below what you typically pay to have your hosted miners online, yet it appears you hashed the same amount as in Q4. Do you have the ability to shut these down opportunistically, or is it "take or pay"? ------------- That's all for now. Overall conclusion is that $MARA has a terrible mining business, but could very well be saved by AI/HPC... though even in that circumstance I wouldn't want to own any due to debt, and how management has historically spoken from an ivory tower made of poop, is late to literally everything, pays themselves too much, and perpetually distorts every thing they do. Disclosure: Have a bunch of $12P. Willing to get burnt if they announce HPC news, and would be happy for all the roped-in shareholders. But I suspect the headline miss to revenue, lack of a firm deal, and terrible "adjusted EBITDA" will rip them a new one.

Buying $VEEV here. Simple thesis: sold off baby with SaaS bathwater. I don't see AI as a threat in regulated industry, nor with customers w/ zero software creation proficiency. Rather, more AI = more molecules = more usage. If/when that theme hits, should benefit.

$MIGI - complete restructuring of board. Sits on 130MW, market cap of $40m. Doofus CEO Mewawalla long gone. Changing name to highly memeable "Big Digital Energy" with ticker $BGDE. (Drop the "G"... it's cleaner.) Up 20%. Can't speak for actual HPC prospects (and wtf happened to the 20MW hpc deal they signed in August 2024)... but easy to imagine it pitched by microcap accounts as "all the other BTC miners up are X% last 2 years but this diamond in the rough isn't", esp if/when the others rally. I prefer proven management and execution, but I have a small position anyway.