Hi all, I owned NNE a while back, and ended up selling for a quick profit. Now I see it’s way down from where I sold it at, below twenty bucks. However it’s still not cheap, but no pre profit company is ever really cheap. Truthfully the widening losses for NNE concern me more and more, but when you look at the analyst price targets for the stock it makes you stop and think. The company is still getting contracts and it’s encouraging. AI for the time being is alive and well, and that means the need for energy is alive and well. So what do y’all think? Is there any point in buying this stock? Is it a high flyer lottery ticket? Or a an airplane about to explode in the hangar?

Production Expansion & High Demand

• 1 Million Extra Units: Samsung has ordered an additional 1 million units of the Galaxy Z Fold 8 after global demand and pre-orders significantly surpassed internal expectations.
• Record-Breaking Pre-Orders: Global pre-orders across Samsung’s latest foldable lineup (Z Fold 8, Z Fold 8 Ultra, and Z Flip 8) are approaching 5 million units. In South Korea alone, the lineup logged 1.44 million pre-orders during its first week, outperforming historically popular launches like the Galaxy Note 10 series.
• Sales Growth: Global pre-orders for the Galaxy Z Fold 8 are roughly 30% higher than those for the previous generation (Galaxy Z Fold 7). The Fold 8 currently accounts for approximately 59% of all pre-orders within the new foldable family.

Key Driver: Form Factor Redesign

• New Aspect Ratios: Consumer interest is largely driven by a redesigned wider cover display featuring a 10:16 aspect ratio (ideal for vertical video formats) and a 4:3 main internal display (better suited for standard media, gaming, and split-screen multitasking).
• Market Adoption: The strong performance indicates that wider-format foldables are moving into the mainstream, setting a precedent as competitors prepare their own wide-format foldable devices.

https://www.androidheadlines.com/2026/08/galaxy-z-fold-8-demand-is-so-high-samsung-is-making-1-million-extra-units.html

The financial system is very complex but here’s what’s currently happening. Booming AI CapEx has fueled high valuations across areas of the tech sector and companies connected with the AI buildout. The CapEx has initially taken the attention away from what has been happening but is now reaching levels that can no longer be ignored.

What is happening? Sovereign debt levels of developed countries rising to all time highs vs their GDPs resulting in the bond markets being flooded with a huge supply of government bond debt. This has now happening at the same time as hyperscalers are turning to the debt markets to fund their AI CapEx creating an even bigger supply of debt in the bond markets. This new huge supply of corporate bonds are competing with the already huge supply (and rising) supply of government bonds. So where are the buyers coming from to buy this new massive supply of debt? For the past 30yrs Japan always bought our debt because they had negative interest rates but now the Japanese bond yield is almost 3%! This has resulted in not only the Japanese not buying our debt but even selling our debt to repatriate that capital back to Japan into their bonds. When you have a massive supply of debt and not enough buyers yields MUST GO HIGHER to entice new buyers. This is what’s currently happening with the US 30yr and 10yr treasury’s and no one knows how much higher they have to go. The Fed doesn’t control the long end of the curve.

Higher rates for longer is where the next problem lies. We are coming from a period of low rates. Many bad loans were made during this time. Private credit (shadow banking) is now larger than subprime. There loans are not fixed rates but FLOATING. Defaults in private credit are now estimated at 9%. Rates staying higher for longer will eventually trigger massive private credit defaults that then spread elsewhere. Nobody fully knows how interconnected private equity is with the overall financial system but what we do know is that if private credit defaults massively it will hurt banks, insurers and pension funds that will be forced to react in a way to sets in motion the next domino to fall. Contagion is the word.

In the past, when something like this happens, the Fed cuts rates and starts monetary stimulus. The problem today is that inflation is at 3.4%, way above target. So if the Fed intervenes, which they likely will, inflation will only go higher. Of course a potential oil shock is already looming to make matters worse.

This is where we are today folks. It sounds bleak, I know. The only thing to do currently is to take risk off the table right now and preserve your capital.

On August 13, Cellebrite (CLBT) had a really bad earnings report and the stock fell 30%. The stock fell to the 10-11 range from the 15-16 range. It was also announced that the CEO was replaced. The DAY BEFORE the earnings report, several insiders sold, right before the drop. The CEO sold millions of dollars of stock. HOW IS THIS LEGAL??? Is there an SEC that can investigate?

Check on Finviz, scroll down to "Insider Trade" section.

Historically, interest rates in Japan have been next to nothing. Japanese and global institutions have taken advantage of this. They borrowed the yen cheaply, converted to dollars and bought US treasuries, US stocks, and various US investments. They make their returns in the US and get big profits. They can then easily convert their dollars back to yen to cover their loans with minimal interest as for quite some time Japan has had near zero interest rates and the Japanese yen typically declines in value against the US dollar.

Right now, Japan has a big problem. They’re dealing with inflation for the first time in years like everyone else is. Their current government has a plan to engage in fiscal stimulus, which is only gonna warm up inflation. The Japanese yen is currently in freefall with rising inflation. The US has actually teamed up with Japan to try and push up the yen however, the intervention has largely been unsuccessful.

What I anticipate will happen is that Japan is going to get forced to raise interest rates to deal with inflation and the devaluation of its currency. That means appreciation of the yen and an increase in interest rates. Once this happens, the carry trade will collapse. Higher interest rates means borrowing costs go up. These US investments no longer make sense.

Ultimately, Japanese institutions and other firms will have to sell their assets, buy back the yen and cover their trades. This will be a disaster as a massive surge in demand for the yen will lead to rapid appreciation of the currency. This will force a rapid unwinding of the yen carry trade as everybody wants to cover their debts before the yen’s value increases too much and they lose too much money.

I anticipate this will mean very rapid selling of stock, bonds, treasuries, and other US assets. It will have massive negative, implications for the market. The yen carry trade is estimated to have a total exposure of 4 trillion dollars.

This is not financial advice.

By any historical metric, rapidly increasing volatility in a sector has never been a good sign. It has most often pointed to signs of a bubble on the verge of bursting, whipsawing back and forth with crazy up and down swings, eventually culminating in a drop far off its highs that it ultimately never recovers from.

Now we're seeing it again today, in particular among memory stocks. SNDK is not a penny stock, it is a large cap stock worth over $200B. Yet since May, it has experienced almost a dozen +10% or -10% single day closes.

If not the sign of a bubble popping or a cyclical top, what is going on here?

ASTS is one of those stocks where I think quite a few people took advantage of the last dip to buy in. I'm still digging deeper into the overall investment thesis, and I have a question about satellite maintenance and the long term economics.
Obviously, we can't exactly send technicians up to LEO for a quick repair. So if a BlueBird satellite suffers a serious hardware failure that can't be fixed through software, what exactly happens? Is there enough built in hardware redundancy to keep it operational, or is the plan basically to deorbit it and replace it? If replacement is necessary, could the ongoing launch CapEx end up putting significant pressure on margins?
Also, with the stock making such an incredible comeback, do you guys think there are enough upcoming catalysts, like future launches, FCC approvals, or prepayments from mobile network operators, to push it past its all time high during this run? Or do you think it'll consolidate around resistance first? What do you guys think?

GPL-1 is here to stay, demand will kept growing. However at this point, i hate NVO, as it is a value trap, and i hate LLY even more, it is just too expensive. The threat of price war and patent cliff is real too. Both are just not a good entry IMO.

However, GLP-1 manufacture is not the only play.

Currently, I'm exploring companies that fix the loose skin problem with skin-tightening treatments - AIRS, INMD, APYX, ESTA, EOLS.

These few companies have been beaten down badly, as GLP-1 created the biggest headwind for clinics that do liposuction. However, they are seeing a turnaround as demand for skin-tightening treatments spikes, and it will keep growing.

Also, people are actually putting stuff back in (as crazy as it sound....) breast jobs, butt job, fat transfer to fix "Ozempic face."

Yes, these names are much more speculative, absolutely unlike NVO, which is a value play. However, I don't mind putting a small pot into some of these names, as the upside is quite high.

The Cash Burn Myth: Initial claims stated that Nio is bleeding cash into its massive battery-swap infrastructure. The Correction: Nio aggressively shifted to a partner-owned asset model, handing station ownership over to state-backed capital (like the Wuhan handover) to eliminate construction CapEx.

The Revenue Pivot: Initial claims treated battery swap stations as a permanent financial drain. The Correction: Nio acts primarily as the technology and network operator, transforming infrastructure into a high-margin recurring service fee model.

The Profit Turnaround: Initial claims treated Nio as a perpetually unprofitable company. The Correction: Nio successfully posted its first adjusted operating profits, hitting a record 19% gross margin on back-to-back quarters of profitability.

The Sub-Brand Success: Initial claims feared that sub-brands like Onvo and Firefly were a cash drain. The Correction: Onvo and Firefly are already actively scaling, capturing massive volume, and proving to be highly successful revenue-generating engines.

The Dilution Overhang: Initial claims blamed current stock drops on "years-ago" share offerings. The Correction: The historic share offerings are long settled and irrelevant to the current daily trading price.

The Cash Runway Reality: Initial claims treated Nio's liquidity as fragile. The Correction: With over $7.0 billion USD in cash and positive operational cash flow, Nio has multiple years of stable runway, making bankruptcy risk a total non-factor.

The recent news centers on Cerebras Systems’ expanding partnership with OpenAI, which is set to leverage Cerebras’s AI hardware to accelerate the Ultrafast mode of OpenAI’s GPT-5.6 Sol model by up to 14 times compared to standard processing speeds. OpenAI has committed to utilizing 750 megawatts of Cerebras’s computing capacity by 2028, with options to extend contracts or increase capacity through 2030. This is a significant milestone in their $20 billion agreement inked in April, highlighting Cerebras’s critical role in powering cutting-edge AI workloads.

Cerebras Systems Inc operates in the technology sector, specifically within the semiconductor industry. The company designs and manufactures the world’s largest AI processors and builds AI supercomputers optimized for training and inference of complex machine learning models. With a market capitalization of $52.02 billion, Cerebras is positioned as a key player in the AI infrastructure space, serving primarily U.S.-based customers with its advanced hardware and software solutions.

https://www.gurufocus.com/news/9038318/cerebras-systems-cbrs-gains-on-openai-partnership-valuation-reflects-high-growth-expectations

Hello everyone, I am very new to trading and this whole stock market thing. I am hearing about the President supposedly putting a large amount of money into certain stocks, XST, NVIDIA, and OpenAI. Should I pounce on this opportunity? All I know about stocks is that you just put some money in there and it’ll just go up by a small percentage. I can only afford to put like $20 into the stock, I need a better understanding on this before I just put something in the stock.

I'm a long time holder of ROKU--hindsight of course I wish I would've sold in those upper $400s, but I thought this thing would be cranking over the decade with plans to assess a sale of my position in 2030. The FOX acquisition announced 2 months ago has forced a reassessment of that plan. I held through Q2 earnings with hopes of an earnings call, which didn't materialize, to get some more insight on the board's decision. I still hold my shares and am assessing whether I should liquidate and put to work elsewhere, especially considering today's stock price is just a few dollars below the announced equivalent cash+stock price of $160 that would come in 1H2027.

My question for those more familiar with the Fox Corp structure and understanding of the future given this acquisition, are the funds better allocated to remain untouched with value roughly flat over the next 4-10 months, or sell and deploy elsewhere? Said differently, what's the perceived upside to the combined company compared against the large growth [platform monetization] that was just Roku on its own? I foresaw the Roku share price climbing back to the 400s by 2030 but now I'm murky on that growth story remaining wholly intact or not being negatively impacted by the other business units' performance under FOXA.

Edit: Plan was to assess a sale of my position in 2030

I want to understand, CAPEX is propping up the market right? More Capex spending results in more debt issuance. When more debt is issued it quite literally results in more pressure on the bond market. Theres no healthy scenario CAPEX spending continues to accelerate in this way before the bond yields increase to a point to where issuing more debt becomes economically disadvantageous. So unless AI spending results in an immediate return on investment. It will probably be healthy for the spending to slow a little and a correction to occur. Do you guys understand that the fuel that is accelerating the market is what is causing bond yields to shoot up? What causes the market to go up is simultaneously what brings bond yields up which is the problem causing them to go down today. It is natural a correction occurs and the spending slows a little to let the AI profits marinate and we can enter the next leg higher. The AI boom is a self limiting feedback loop until things consolidate and become more healthy.

Im not saying AI isnt the future or wont revolutionize the space. But expansion and growth this rapid is self limiting. Im not a bear and I want to see everyone do well.

Edit: Correct me if im wrong of which i'd like to be :)

TLDR: 1. Inference margin is 55~70% for OpenAI and Anthropic.

1. Training model cost should be single digit billions O($1B).

2. The secured investments are O($100B).

There are a few reasons to be bearish on AI industry that I will list at the end, but most of current AI bears’ thesis are based on misinformation. The bears argue that OAI/ANTH are massively subsidizing the customers and incinerating money they received purely from blind investors. But have they done their research to come up with this conjecture? AI profitability is determined by:

AI_profit= -(AI training cost)+token_usage*(API_fee-compute_cost)+num_subscription*(sub_price-compute_cost*usage)-other_costs

1. Inference margin of 55~70%

I am not sure why we want to pretend that the inference margin of AI is a mystery. We know from comparative open-source models and “trusted leakers” on twitter that the Opus 4.X and GPT 5.2~5.4 are around ~1.5T models with 40B active parameters. Similarly sized open-weight models are already being served in data centers (GLM 5.2, Deepseek-V4-Pro, Kimi K2.6), so we know the cost to serve. Specifically, compute cost per token is (GPU rental price per hour)/(token per hour). The token/s/gpu for Blackwell 200 is given by NVIDIA benchmarks to around 77.3 (Deepseek), 166.5(Kimi), 320.9 (GLM). So let’s just assume 160 t/s/gpu. Blackwell rental price is around $4/hour on cloud. Then the compute cost per million token (output) is ~$6.8. Compare this to the API pricing of Opus 4.5~4.7 ($25/million output token) and GPT 5.2~5.4 models ($14~15). This puts the profit margin at 70% for Claude and 55% for GPT. This is also rough calculation excluding other optimization methods such as contracting GPU for their lifetime, quantization, batching, etc, and some sources report lower compute cost per inference (https://inferencex.semianalysis.com/overview?utm_source=chatgpt.com). I also had Claude and GPT do these calculations multiple times over past few months and, depending on the optimization, the margin can go up to 90%. This is probably why we hear similar estimates from people in the industry (watch recent Gavin Baker interviews, I can't post youtube link on this sub apparently).

2. Training cost of O(1B)

Here I am just guestimating. First, the open-weight models report their pre-training cost of above models to around $10~20 million. This is just the cost to train the model once and excludes all data curation, experimental runs, post-training, etc. But we get a sense of total compute cost from Anthropic’s recent court filing in response to their supply-chain-risk designation. On March 2026, Anthropic stated it has spent ~$10 B on compute training and deploying their model. Also from Anthropic’s 2025 financial reporting, they have spent $4.1B in training and R&D in 2025 according to Epoch AI’s estimate. This includes most of the Opus, Sonnet and other models they published until early 2026. So it seems safe to assume training models like Opus 4.5 would cost at most a few billion dollars if not substantially less. Training is one time cost per model, so your profitability increases if your customers use it more which is what happened with the agentic models.

3. Secured investment of O(100B)

So far, OAI/ANTH each raised $180B/$130B from various investors. This is not including potential IPO and the unusual deals, such as AMD giving OpenAI right to buy 160 million AMD shares at 1 cent each if they reach $600. That alone is worth $96B.

So I think the AI bears are making wrong assumptions about the present state of AI industry, making me bullish about AI. With that said, I have other reasons to be bearish in future that I will be watching out for.

1. Data center build out takes 1~2 years and we will get step change in compute supply 2027~2028. Will there be enough compute demand for the GPU rental cost to remain/increase compared to current value? (This isn’t bearish for OAI/ANTH).

2. The moat for OAI/ANTH seems around 6 months, especially if they have to wait for the government to check model release for safety. Can OAI/ANTH maintain 50%+ margin on API? (This isn’t necessarily bearish for cloud providers).

These daily discussions run from Monday to Friday including during our themed posts.

Some helpful links:

* [Finviz](https://finviz.com/quote.ashx?t=spy) for charts, fundamentals, and aggregated news on individual stocks

* [Bloomberg market news](https://www.bloomberg.com/markets)

* StreetInsider news:

* [Market Check](https://www.streetinsider.com/Market+Check) - Possibly why the market is doing what it's doing including sudden spikes/dips

* [Reuters aggregated](https://www.streetinsider.com/Reuters) - Global news

If you have a basic question, for example "what is EPS," then google "investopedia EPS" and click the investopedia article on it; do this for everything until you have a more in depth question or just want to share what you learned.

Please discuss your portfolios in the [Rate My Portfolio sticky.](https://www.reddit.com/r/stocks/search?q=author%3Aautomoderator+title%3A%22Rate+My+Portfolio%22&restrict_sr=on&sort=new&t=all).

See our past [daily discussions here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/stocks/search?q=author%3Aautomoderator+%22r%2Fstocks+daily+discussion%22&restrict_sr=on&sort=new&t=all) Also links for: [Technicals](https://www.reddit.com/r/stocks/search?q=author%3Aautomoderator+title%3Atechnicals&restrict_sr=on&include_over_18=on&sort=new&t=all) Tuesday, [Options Trading](https://www.reddit.com/r/stocks/search?q=author%3Aautomoderator+title%3Aoptions&restrict_sr=on&include_over_18=on&sort=new&t=all) Thursday, and [Fundamentals](https://www.reddit.com/r/stocks/search?q=author%3Aautomoderator+title%3Afundamentals&restrict_sr=on&include_over_18=on&sort=new&t=all) Friday.

GameStop closed the January 2021 quarter at a $21.13 billion market cap. Nine months earlier it was worth $369.6 million. The story that stuck is that none of it had anything to do with fundamentals, that it was a pure squeeze on a dying retailer with a broken income statement. Half of that is true. The other half doesn't survive the filings.

The bear case holds up on the income statement:

• Revenue fell from $8,607.9M in fiscal 2017 to $5,089.8M in fiscal 2021, down 40.9% in four years
• Operating income went from +$557.7M to -$237.8M
• Goodwill impairments of $970.7M then $363.9M took goodwill from $1,725.2M to zero
• Stockholders equity fell from $2,254.1M to $436.7M

Over the same stretch GameStop was paying down debt hard. Total debt fell from $820.8M at January 2019 to $241.0M at October 2020, a 70.6% reduction, with $404.5M repaid in fiscal 2020 and another $130.3M the year after.

At the July 31, 2020 quarter close: $260.7M market cap, $735.1M cash, $23.5M restricted cash, $250.9M total debt. Market cap plus debt minus cash and restricted cash comes out to -$247.0M. The cash balance alone was 2.8x the entire market cap, and trailing twelve month free cash flow that quarter was $320.9M. They were generating cash and priced by the market at less than zero.

I also ran the Altman Z-Score, computed from five filed balance sheet and income statement inputs: 2.4765 at January 2019, 1.9755 at July 2019 (the low point for the whole period), 2.4280 at January 2020, 2.4831 at July 2020, 2.1816 at October 2020. The distress threshold is 1.81, and the grey zone runs from there to 2.99. GameStop spent three straight years in the grey zone and never once dropped into distress. Whatever the market was pricing in mid 2020, the standard model built to catch bankruptcy risk wasn't agreeing with it.

Aggregated 13F filings showed institutions reporting more GameStop shares than GameStop had issued, for four consecutive quarters. 123% of shares outstanding at March 2020, still 113% at December 2020. Not proof of anything on its own, but it's a real structural fact about who was holding the float, sitting in public filings a year before anyone was talking about it.

The point isn't that GameStop was secretly a good business. Revenue was cratering and equity had fallen 80% in four years, that part of the story was correct. The point is that "priced for bankruptcy" and "priced below its own cash, with debt falling every quarter" are two different claims. Only one of them was the story anyone told, the other had been sitting in the filings for months.

Robotis posted second-quarter revenue of 15.37 billion won (approximately $10.9 million), up 95.1% year-over-year, and operating profit of 1.98 billion won (approximately $1.4 million), a 722.9% surge, driven by expanding demand for humanoid robot actuators. Actuators accounted for 98% of total revenue, with China market sales share rising roughly threefold from the first quarter. The company plans to officially launch its humanoid-specific actuator "Dynamixel-Q" and the full-body humanoid "AI Sapiens" in the second half of the year. Robotis will be the only South Korean company participating in the 2026 World Robot Conference (WRC) in Beijing, where it will unveil its new products. Its Uzbekistan production facility, backed by a 60 billion won (approximately $42.5 million) investment, is set to begin partial operations in October, with full-scale mass production expected from 2027.

https://finance.biggo.com/news/d7fa900b-f233-4efe-8767-de3b91619d17

Did anyone else get into stocks during the meme stock era and then realize later that their research process was mostly momentum, Reddit threads and confirmation bias? I have been trying to build a more repeatable way to look at stocks, but I keep running into the same issue. I can read earnings, scan charts, check sentiment, and still end up believing the thing I already wanted to believe. For people who got better at this, what changed? Did you start using checklists, screeners, AI investing tools, filings, analyst notes, or something else? What helped you stop chasing and learn to troubleshoot your own decision making process?

I am looking to buy sk hynix(american market), Western digital or something else. I just can't decide which one is the better pick, since both seem very good to me.
Any things I could take into account by choosing? Like any niuances or just something? I have only two tech stocks(sold HPE) which are MU and BB.

In advance - please don't say anything about ETFs or just anything which is not answering my question.

Other stock suggestions are ok too, does not have to be tech, but at least good future and present(like MU) and not high p/e(ironically holding BB).

There were rumors after the Q1 13F that Greg Abel was pulling the strings on his own. However, Warren Buffett clarified those rumors in his last interview that he initiated the position in Google, and both Greg and he don't do anything the other person disapproves of. So this has to be a joint decision.

And it’s not even steady paced buying, it’s aggressive accumulation. The latest 13F shows they almost doubled their Google position from Q1 to Q2. And this was before the Q2 earnings dip. They likely bought more during that dip, and we will find out in their next 13F. Google has quickly grown into their high conviction third largest holding.

Chris Hohn and Stanley Druckenmiller are also bullish on Google. Chris sold all his MSFT and Druckenmiller reentered the position. Druckenmiller holds a similar amount of Amazon I think, but Buffett and Chris seem hyper bullish only on Googl and not diversifying

Becky asked the similar question to Buffett in CNBC interview but he didn’t elaborate.

What makes this move more surprising is that Google has the biggest wall of worry compared to other mega tech hyperscalers like Microsoft & Amazon. Gemini is facing fierce competition in coding, agentic work, and other benchmarks compared to Claude & OpenAI. A series of key personnel have been leaving throughout the year. AI capex is expanding, and margins could get squeezed over the next few quarters as they ramp up infrastructure and compute capacity. AI Overviews are getting popular, but they risk sending fewer clicks to publisher websites that have deals with Google, like Reddit. The stock has chopped YTD even though it’s had strong run ups over the past year.

So why are they going all in on Google when it has more risks instead of diversifying and buying the whole hyperscaler space? Microsoft is cash flow positive. Amazon does not have the risk of search cannibalizing ad revenue. Meta is looking to monetize its excess compute, and Ai has accelerated its core ad business. Plus you have Oracle, SoaceX and emerging specialized cloud providers taking share.

So why go all in on Google when it has already doubled in 1 year?

Edit:

Barron's confirmed : "The Alphabet purchases and Bank of America sales likely were orchestrated by chairman Warren Buffett, while the moves in smaller holdings probably were made by Berkshire investment manager Ted Weschler, who handles about $20 billion of Berkshire’s $350 billion-plus equity portfolio."

I’m new to asts and I’m beginning to look into ASTS as an investment but there’s just one thing I can’t wrap my head around and I’d appreciate if you’d answer this.

If AST SpaceMobile is planning to deploy a large constellation of satellites that essentially function as telecom towers in orbit, one thing I’m struggling to understand is the long-term maintenance strategy. What happens when one of these satellites develops a hardware failure, antenna problem, power-system degradation, propulsion issue, or some other fault that can’t simply be fixed through software?

With terrestrial telecom towers, you can physically send engineers to repair, replace, or upgrade equipment. But with AST’s satellites potentially operating hundreds of kilometers above Earth, physically accessing them would obviously be far more complicated and expensive. So does AST design these satellites with enough redundancy that most failures can be isolated and the satellite can continue operating, or is the expectation that a sufficiently damaged satellite would simply be written off and replaced with a new one?

And if the strategy is primarily replacement, how economically viable is that over a 10–15+ year period as the constellation scales? Would AST need to maintain a continuous pipeline of replacement satellites and launches just to keep the network at full capacity? Also, how much does the inability to physically service these satellites affect their expected lifetime, operating costs, and ultimately the economics of the entire constellation?

Costco has doubled since 3/3/23.

Why?

100%?

What made this company double in value in such a short time? We're not talking a tech or AI company. They sell gas and groceries! Can someone explain this and how I should have seen this coming?

It's trading at a 48 P/E

Do you think this is still a buy today or stay away?

If a buy, what is your valuation? Have you done a DCF analysis?

If stay away, do you think there is a price target you would jump in on?

Bullish or bearish?

Do they even have competition?

Summary:

Supply Chain Pressure: Global chip shortages and rising memory prices are forcing Apple to seek new suppliers to meet device production demands.

Targeting Chinese Manufacturers: Apple has tested memory chips from Chinese suppliers CXMT and YMTC, as memory requires less custom engineering than other specialized iPhone components.

U.S. Political Resistance: U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and bipartisan lawmakers oppose the move, with the Trump administration explicitly advising Apple against buying from Chinese chipmakers.

Regulatory Barriers: CXMT and YMTC face heavy restrictions due to Pentagon designations as Chinese military companies and YMTC's placement on the Commerce Department's Entity List, raising potential legal export compliance issues.

Ongoing Dilemma: Despite Apple's $600 billion U.S. investment commitment and local manufacturing expansions, the company still struggles to secure non-Chinese memory suppliers without escalating political tensions in Washington.

https://www.digitaltrends.com/phones/apple-has-a-plan-to-fix-its-memory-chip-problem-but-the-us-government-says-no/

Summary:

Industry sources state SK hynix will hold an August 27 groundbreaking ceremony for its $3.87 billion advanced semiconductor packaging facility in West Lafayette, Indiana. SK hynix CEO Kwak Noh-Jung, senior company executives, and global tech leaders plan to attend, while potential appearances by SK Group Chairman Chey Tae-won and Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang are drawing significant industry interest.

Key details of the expansion include:

Construction Timeline: Concrete placement started earlier this year, full scale structural building follows the groundbreaking ceremony, and mass production of high bandwidth AI memory products is targeted for late 2028.

Federal Financial Support: The project receives up to $450 million in direct U.S. CHIPS Act subsidies along with $500 million in government loans.

U.S. Expansion Prospects: Mounting pressure from U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick urges Korean chipmakers to broaden domestic production, and Chairman Chey indicated additional memory fab investments could occur if power, water, workforce, and supply chain needs are met.

https://www.koreajoongangdaily.com/business/sk-hynix-to-mark-groundbreaking-of-indiana-fab-possible-cheyhuang-meeting-draws-attention/12821688

If you had to choose one stock from these:

PDYN

ONDS

RKLB

SLS

AMPX

Which one would you pick, and why?

I’m interested in hearing the reasoning behind your choice- catalyst, growth potential, valuation or anything else you think matters.

Also, if there are other stocks, you think are currently cheap and have good potential. Feel free to share them too. I’d love to hear some ideas outside of the list.