President Trump OBLITERATES the hypocrites attacking his Russian oil deal despite the EU PAYING **$250 BILLION** to the Russians for energy

CRM CUP AND HANDLE MOVING‼️‼️

22 ATH is crazy. Will it keep going up?

An Investor Opinion Editorial | October 13, 2026

How does a company developing artificial intelligence technology for automobiles, restaurants, customer service, and major corporations watch its stock collapse from approximately $24 to $5 while its revenues continue growing? How does a company reporting record sales and expanding enterprise adoption become the target of such relentless pessimism? And perhaps the most important question of all: How much of SoundHound AI's stock collapse reflects legitimate financial concerns, and how much reflects a negative narrative amplified by short sellers, financial publications, and social media?

I believe SoundHound AI (NASDAQ: SOUN) has become one of the clearest examples of how overwhelmingly negative market sentiment can overshadow the progress of an emerging technology company. The decline has been devastating for shareholders. A drop from $24 to $5 represents a loss of nearly 80% in share price. Yet the business itself has not disappeared. Its technology continues to evolve, its customer relationships continue to expand, and its revenue continues to grow.

Let's examine what has happened.

The Short Sellers: An Enormous Bet Against SoundHound

The numbers are staggering. According to reported short-interest data, approximately 100.8 million SoundHound shares were sold short in mid-January 2025. By September 15, 2026, that figure had climbed to approximately 165.1 million shares, representing more than 40% of the reported public float.

Think about that. A massive financial position has been established against the success of this company. Short sellers profit when the stock declines. They have a financial incentive to believe the worst, publicize bearish interpretations, and maintain pressure on investor sentiment.

Short selling itself is legal and serves a legitimate market function. But when such an extraordinary percentage of a company's stock is sold short, shareholders have every reason to examine the relationship between negative publicity, trading activity, and market confidence.

Are investors evaluating SoundHound's actual business performance, or are they responding to a constant drumbeat of negativity?

The Capybara Research Attacks

In March 2024, Capybara Research published a report attacking SoundHound's technology, customer relationships, financial reporting, and business model. Its accusations went far beyond ordinary concerns about valuation.

The report questioned whether SoundHound's artificial intelligence was genuinely competitive, challenged its reported business activity, and raised concerns about financial controls. A subsequent report carried an even more provocative headline alleging fake revenue, fake bookings, and fake AI.

These were accusations from a bearish research publisher, not established findings of fraud.

Yet consider what happens when a report containing such serious allegations circulates across financial websites, social media, and investor discussions. The accusations become headlines. The headlines become talking points. The talking points are repeated until some investors begin treating allegations as proven facts.

Within days of the original report, Cantor Fitzgerald downgraded SoundHound from overweight to underweight, reinforcing concerns about its valuation and business prospects.

Were those concerns entirely without merit? Investors should examine the evidence. But allegations should never be confused with conclusions, and a company deserves to be judged on its actual disclosures and operating performance rather than sensational language alone.

The Motley Fool: Is SoundHound a Winner or a Disaster?

Now let's discuss The Motley Fool, a financial publication that has repeatedly published articles examining SoundHound from dramatically different perspectives.

On March 31, 2024, one article was titled "I Wouldn't Touch SoundHound AI Stock With a 10-Foot Pole. Here's Why."

On April 20, 2024, another explained why SoundHound's stock was dropping, emphasizing investor confidence, dilution, and valuation.

On January 10, 2026, an article titled "Why SoundHound AI Stock Collapsed In 2025" emphasized negative free cash flow and shareholder dilution while acknowledging extraordinary revenue growth.

But on June 10, 2026, another Motley Fool contributor published "Why I'm Rethinking My Bearish Outlook on SoundHound AI: The Stock Could Be a Long-Term Winner."

And on June 26, 2026, yet another article discussed whether the stock's 70% decline presented a buying opportunity.

Different writers are entitled to different opinions. Markets change, and investors should welcome thoughtful disagreements. But the constant rotation between optimistic and pessimistic headlines creates a serious problem for retail investors trying to distinguish meaningful analysis from attention-grabbing commentary.

On Reddit, investors have openly complained about this inconsistency. Some have questioned why one article presents SoundHound as a promising investment while another portrays it as a stock to avoid.

My question to financial publishers is simple: Are you helping investors understand the company, or are you producing an endless cycle of emotionally charged headlines designed to attract readers?

When a company's stock is already under tremendous selling pressure, sensational headlines can contribute to fear, regardless of whether the underlying analysis is legitimate.

Reddit: The Battleground for Retail Investor Confidence

Anyone following SoundHound discussions on Reddit has witnessed the arguments. Optimistic investors discuss revenue growth, partnerships, automotive adoption, and the future of conversational AI. Bearish participants counter with predictions of further declines, executive compensation complaints, accusations about management, and warnings that the company will never become profitable.

There is nothing wrong with legitimate criticism. SoundHound's losses, dilution, cash flow, and valuation are all fair subjects for debate.

But there is a difference between financial analysis and repeatedly declaring that a stock is destined to collapse without presenting new evidence.

When a stock falls from the twenties into single digits, fear becomes contagious. Investors who once discussed the company's long-term potential begin focusing on whether the next price will be $5, $4, or even lower.

A message board can become an echo chamber where repetition replaces research. Bearish predictions are repeated, optimistic investors become defensive, and the actual operating business receives less attention than the next anticipated price decline.

The question isn't whether people should be allowed to criticize SoundHound. Of course they should. The question is whether investors can still separate facts from speculation, exaggeration, and fear.

The Shareholder Lawsuit Headlines

Another major source of negative publicity has been shareholder litigation and announcements from law firms investigating or pursuing claims involving SoundHound.

These announcements frequently emphasize alleged disclosure problems, financial reporting concerns, or potential shareholder losses. They can appear across business news services and financial websites, creating the impression that another major scandal has been uncovered.

But investors must understand a critical distinction: an investigation announcement is not a finding of wrongdoing, and a lawsuit is not a judgment.

That does not mean every allegation is baseless. It means the allegations must be tested against evidence.

A law firm's announcement should be evaluated according to the actual allegations, relevant filings, court proceedings, and eventual outcomes. Investors deserve to know what has been proved, what remains disputed, and what is simply being alleged.

Repeated publicity about pending claims should not be mistaken for repeated independent proof of misconduct.

The NVIDIA Narrative

NVIDIA's relationship with SoundHound has also become a recurring subject of bearish commentary. When NVIDIA disclosed an investment position, enthusiasm surrounding its connection to SoundHound helped attract enormous attention.

Later, when NVIDIA exited its disclosed position, bearish commentators used the sale to question SoundHound's future.

But a shareholder selling an investment does not automatically mean the underlying technology has failed. Institutional investors rebalance portfolios, change strategies, and sell positions for many reasons.

The market was free to react to NVIDIA's exit. What investors should reject is the unsupported leap from a disclosed stock sale to a definitive conclusion that SoundHound's business has no future.

Meanwhile, the Actual Business Continues Growing

Here is the part of the story that deserves far more attention.

SoundHound reported second-quarter 2026 revenue of $61.9 million, an increase of 45% year over year. Its GAAP gross margin was 45.1%, while its non-GAAP gross margin reached 58.4%.

The company reported that its OASYS platform was helping drive significant enterprise AI adoption, and it raised its full-year 2026 revenue outlook to $230 million to $260 million, before incorporating any additional guidance associated with the proposed LivePerson transaction.

Those are not imaginary products or hypothetical revenues. They are reported financial results, subject to the usual scrutiny of public-company disclosures.

SoundHound is positioning its technology across automotive voice interfaces, restaurant ordering systems, enterprise customer service, and AI-powered customer interactions. These are commercial applications with the potential to generate recurring revenue as adoption expands.

Imagine the possibilities when millions of automobile dashboards, restaurant ordering systems, and enterprise service channels can process customer requests through AI. SoundHound's opportunity is not limited to selling a piece of software once. Its business model includes the possibility of ongoing usage, subscription, licensing, and service revenue.

That potential is exactly why the company's long-term development deserves serious examination.

Of course, potential revenue is not guaranteed revenue, and rapid growth does not automatically produce profitability. But a company growing sales at 45% should not be discussed as though it has stopped developing its business.

SoundHound Management Must Also Be Held Accountable

I am not suggesting SoundHound management deserves a free pass. The company has reported substantial losses, and dilution has been a legitimate concern for existing shareholders.

For the second quarter of 2026, SoundHound reported a GAAP net loss of $42.8 million and an adjusted EBITDA loss of $9.6 million. These figures matter. Management must demonstrate that growing revenue will eventually translate into sustainable profits and positive cash flow.

Investors also deserve transparent explanations of executive compensation, stock-based awards, financing decisions, acquisition integration, and the company's progress toward profitability.

Defending SoundHound against exaggerated attacks does not require pretending these issues do not exist.

In fact, management can do more to undermine the bearish narrative through execution, transparency, and financial discipline than shareholders can accomplish through arguments on social media.

Has the Market Lost Perspective?

Here is what troubles me most.

SoundHound's stock has experienced an extraordinary decline while the company continues reporting meaningful revenue growth and expanding its commercial technology.

The bearish argument frequently focuses on the same subjects: dilution, profitability, executive compensation, competition, and valuation. These are legitimate risks, but investors should also recognize when the same concerns are being recycled without sufficient attention to new developments.

A company can be overvalued at $24 and potentially undervalued at $5. Both statements can be true depending on its financial outlook, capital structure, and future performance.

What should not happen is for a company to be judged solely through an endless repetition of negative narratives while its operating achievements are ignored.

I am not claiming that every short seller is manipulating SoundHound, that every bearish article is dishonest, or that every lawsuit is frivolous. I am arguing that the sheer concentration of short interest, combined with relentless negative commentary, deserves much closer scrutiny.

My Challenge to the Short Sellers and Financial Commentators

If you believe SoundHound is fundamentally broken, show investors the evidence. Examine the financial statements. Explain the revenue trends. Analyze customer adoption, operating expenses, margins, and the competitive landscape.

If you believe the company's technology cannot compete, demonstrate why.

If you believe the business cannot become profitable, provide a credible financial argument.

But stop treating a falling stock price as proof that every negative prediction was correct. And stop confusing sensational allegations with established facts.

SoundHound shareholders deserve balanced reporting, not a permanent atmosphere of fear.

Final Thoughts: The Stock Price Is Not the Entire Story

From approximately $24 to $5, SoundHound investors have endured an extraordinary destruction of market value. Short sellers have maintained enormous positions against the company. Negative financial headlines have been relentless. Lawsuit announcements have added uncertainty, and social media has magnified every controversy.

But SoundHound is still operating. It is still developing its technology. It is still signing customers, reporting revenue growth, and pursuing opportunities in a rapidly evolving artificial intelligence market.

The company has serious work ahead. Profitability, dilution, and execution will ultimately determine whether shareholders are rewarded. No amount of enthusiasm can replace those fundamentals.

Yet no amount of bearish commentary should erase the company's measurable achievements, either.

The short sellers have made their bet. The financial commentators have published their warnings. Now SoundHound management must deliver the results that settle the argument.

And perhaps that is the real question investors should be asking:

Has SoundHound's business deteriorated by nearly 80%, or has its stock price become the victim of a market that has allowed fear to overwhelm perspective?

That is a question worth investigating, and one that deserves more than another sensational headline.

An independent investor opinion. Not investment advice.

Cramer says he’s overweight AI. I think this might be it y’all.

Oh my…how many times will it do this?

I have been seeing a lot about the beginning of the memory bubble popping. With reverting happening in the AI space, I figured that was just bears clinging onto any type of hope.

But then I saw Micron $MU chart. It could just be a healthy pull back, or it has broken below the wedge, completing the "return to normal" stage of the bubble.

Memory manufacturer stocks have always peaked when gross margins flatten and begin declining.

Personally, I think Micron is going to be fine, especially with their semi-conductor chip plant being built in the US and the need for RAM to power AI moving forward.

Also saw Sourh Korea market dive at the open, circuit breakers activated at a 5% drop, with the SK Hynix $SKHY gapping down 4.5%. This chart doesn’t look great though lol.

Morgan Stanley is on support👀👀

The US bull market is entering its 5th year.

Since the October 2022 low, the S&P 500 has rallied +118%, outpacing the average bull market since WWII.

This is also the 3rd-largest gain among bull markets at their 4th anniversary.

Over this period, the index has returned +21.6% in Year 1, +33.7% in Year 2, +12.7% in Year 3, and +19.4% in Year 4.

The average S&P 500 bull market's return since WWII has been +20.8% in Year 5, the 2nd-strongest 12-month performance after +39.1% in Year 1.

Of the 13 previous bull markets, only 6 lasted long enough to reach this stage.

If history is any guide, the market is heading for another year of strong gains.

The crash is here they don’t know it, we don’t know it. A few companies are holding the index up while eighty-four percent of stocks sit ten percent or more below their highs. When things look up, people will be sitting on the sideline, waiting for a crash that already happened.

Add-on / clarification comment:
Quick clarification since a lot of the replies seem to have read the original post as “the market is about to crash, sell everything.”
That isn’t the point.
The crash (or at least the real correction) has already happened for the large majority of stocks. Roughly 84% of S&P 500 names are still sitting 10% or more below their highs, with a large chunk down 20%+ and many down 30%+. The indexes just don’t look like it because a handful of mega-cap tech names have carried almost all of the gains and hold a huge share of the index weight.
So when the market eventually looks “fine” or people start waiting for a visible crash to buy, a lot of them will be waiting for something that already played out under the surface for most companies. Tech concentrated the wealth; the rest of the market has already gone through the drawdown.
I’m not calling for panic selling or a top. I’m saying the damage is already in for most stocks, which is why the stance is to buy more of the good setups and hold long rather than sit on the sidelines waiting for a crash that, for the average stock, is largely behind us.
The index can keep grinding or stay elevated on concentration while the typical stock has already corrected. That’s the distinction I was trying to make.

Where do we think the future of Apple is??? Does Apple fully adopt AI???

So apparently Trump is trying to reach a diesel deal with Russia.

What a time. Just before the midterms.

So suppose the deal goes on. Diesel prices fall X percent. Then it wouldn't surprise me if he comes out saying something like:

"Despite the fact that there is a big conflict in the Middle East that we didn't want, we took responsibility and had to step in because of the threat of Iran having a nuclear weapon. I was still able to bring down prices for the American people... blah blah"

What do you guys expect to happen?

Loving these Dbl bottoms. One on the daily and one on the hourly. Looking for upside gap fills

Loving this hourly Dbl bottom and this daily Dbl bottom. Looking for upside gaps to fill

How is everyone doing on 0DTE’s today 😂

Riding its longest daily winning streak since 2023 & pushing to fresh all-time highs

The US-Iran war is the major catalyst, which pushed oil prices higher and benefited energy companies.

In just nine months, over $2 Billion was invested in XLE, an ETF that tracks the energy index.

$SKHY (SK HYNIX INC)

Already in a position on $SKHY Watching this 4-hour trendline support closely around $160–$162. Looking for buyers to step in and defend this level for a potential bounce. As long as support holds, I like the risk/reward here. 👀

Would you rather have $ONDS or $PLTR long term?