I don't trade it although I have been tempted because of the like of it here but looks like a tradeable stock in a range.
OT: Stock and Investment Thread
- Thread starter RU05
- Start date
Maybe...I wouldn't think it's confirmed but I think QCOM, MU are better valuation in semis.
Market as a whole up on Powell's comments but some retail up nicely. HD among others making a nice comeback. I mean as a whole retail numbers have been solid to good this last qtr. Guidance didn't seem too bad either. Consumer spending doesn't seem to be waning yet at least despite inflation.
I've owned it for about 35% to the downside. Finally got fed up and started selling, and then rolling, calls against it, that's been working.
I’ve been trading the MU bounces but would not be the least bit annoyed if I got stuck with a longer term position. Cheap stock with upside.
I keep telling myself that SOFI is a long-term hold and may hang on out of stubbornness at this point. The quarter they reported yesterday was good and won’t take much to keep the shorts running for cover with a bit more momentum.
Stick to the 5-6 quarter point increases and the market will do just fine in 2022. 8-10% up year (which means, huge increases from right now).
Pure P/E valuations?
Ya those guys are cheaper, but I think the story is AMD, like NVDA, is looked at as more cutting edge, and thus less concerned about chips eventually flooding the market.
But great growth in all of them.
AMD 50% eps growth expected yoy.
MU 50% growth expected, into 2022, and then another 30% on top of that. And they are the cheapest of the group.
QCOM's growth not expected to be as robust but still very impressive.
It did dip below this level, but then quickly got back up here. At this point there shouldn't be too much downside risk.
I think it continues to go up and down with the market. But when the market finally breaks out, it will break out with it.
I think this situation is showing how much power the "West" has aside from it's military strength.
Might want to show off more of this might.
Yea that's part of it and I like the divy that QCOM has vs the others (not the main reason for it) and the earnings were strong and I think the multiple is fair. I like NVDA too and their earnings strong as well and I own it from a long time ago but I don't know if that's a stock I could add on to...multiple is important imo. I think there's still a push pull in growth vs value and how much the market is willing to pay for growth. I think there's still a feeling out of where that equilibrium is.
Also back of my mind wonder while there's a supply shortage currently will there supply gluts in the future which affect the semis.
Probably good for Crypto and China.
Never thought I would hear a Fed chair say something like that. I don't know what to think of it.
What am I missing here…I interpreted Powell’s comment to mean the US digital dollar and not some other reserve currency.
Very, very good for crypto. Powell is talking about the US having a stable coin like Tether or USDC. That would be a HUGE sign a confidence from the US government.
Right…but if there is a USDC why would that be good for the 12,000 other cryptocurrencies that apparently exist?
Case in point, once digital currencies such as a digital ruble or dollar take hold what becomes of the 12,000 crypto currencies:
11,985 of those don't need to exist and many won't over the long run. The crypto market is BTC, ETH, and the top 8-10 alts. That's all that matters.
When the world enters the digital currency realm and regulators take aim at cryptocurrencies not directly associated with a country it could get very interesting. I think there’s a strong case that the digital dollar, digital yuan, etc. will have a negative impact on BTC and ETH.
Sorry, completely different value props. Not even apples and oranges.....rather apples and rigatoni pasta.
I'm not too opinionated about crypto one way or another.
I get mostly interested in the mining aspects
I can see where crypto can be good but I dont think its as secure as others think
I do know that there's a much larger push for the global governance thing than people realize
China has bought off legions of people (they also use blackmail and hookers)
WEF has tons of people of people in gov and its clear their devotees want to control people's banking/finances
Look at what happened in Canada - US wants to do that
US already made a hard push to monitor peoples bank accounts and hire 80+ IRS staff
Governments are intentionally going from "passive" to "active" governance
I think crypto has been on the "boiling frog" model - increments
If governments said "OK we are going digital" there would be massive resistance
I think they were fine with letting crypto get established as a precursor to micro government control
People are getting broken-in now. There are crypto options on websites, crypto vending machines etc
I don't think there's any way governments let crypto keep going on the sidelines
You need a device and a grid and internet to do digital
As long as thats true the governments get you when they want you
China was the one initiating the global virus passport thing via the WHO
If people/nations keep capitulating to them the web just gets tighter
No accident Trudeau is a WEF golden boy who says China is ideal model
Now I'm still inchoate about all of this but I see some broad outlines and shadows on the wall
Lots of things are breaking bad and its not an accident
The Bond villians really want the reserve dollar crippled
We really dont want a digital currency because then we will be bacteria in a dish
On another note - Russia now going full Kong on civilians
Last edited:
Snow was like the last of the high flyers.
This is near the level it bounced off of back in May, so maybe some support here. Looks like the bad news here is rev's will only grow 70% next year. But when you're trading at 77x sales, while not being profitable, I guess you need more than that.
Wouldn't be surprised to see a bounce and people look to jump in, but wouldn't be surprised to see this continue on a downward slog either.
Do these crypto "projects" or whatever they want to call themselves eventually become regular ole companies that deal in crypto?
Many of the alt coin projects do seem like they do something, which if crypto sticks, would be helpful, or even necessary. My question though, is why do the coin thing instead of a business thing?
….RU#’s might be interested though 
We spoke about SNOW a few weeks ago. Probably the most expensive non-micro cap company today. Damn expensive!
But what's the problem with the report? Guidance seems in line with expectations.
Last edited:
Good point, that multiple of revenue with no profits is crazy, in my view. Still expensive to me.
Nothing wrong with the report, only the valuation. Or perhaps better but the problem is the report relative to the valuation.
To make specific this point.
Snow had a market cap of $80b. Next years rev's are projected to be $2b. So the fwd price to rev's is 40x. If they, as currently are projected to do, grow rev's to $4.3b which is massive growth, in 2025, the price to sales at current valuation is 18ish x. That's still kind of expensive.
Price to sales companies should be in the 10-15x area. Anything higher and there better be one hell of a compelling reason for it.
I’m in one that is set up this way. Their reasoning was to fund the business through NFTs/coins as a way to crowdfund the project rather than getting VC funding. I’m sure there’s as many scams as there are legit setups, but we shall see. The SEC actually announced today they are looking into the legality of this, so more to be revealed.
I was somewhat involved with M&A in the dot.com era. I remember prior to that, the thought of any valuation based on revenue with no profits was a head scratcher, at least for my company. It shifted to some valuations being based on multiple of revenue without profits but I always approached with caution. I was somewhat acquiescent regarding this on a case by case basis but the crazy valuations at the height of dot.com, and what we see now sometimes is puzzling.
Do we see a time where they convert coins to stocks as these projects become public companies?
For all you dividend lovers out there:
The assumption would be just like a VC, the coin or NFT holder would have access to some type of stock, equity, etc.
Article about SEC looking into this…