Basis Points Sep 20, 2026 1h 12m 46m saved
With Steve Fiorillo, Seeking Alpha analyst and co-host of Basis Points · Amit Kukreja, investor and co-host of Basis Points
Both hosts of Basis Points came into the week wanting to own Anthropic. By the end of it neither did, and the reason was an essay its chief executive wrote asking governments to regulate his own industry.
The usual complaint about an AI lab is that it moves too fast. Their complaint is the opposite: a chief executive who asks to be slowed down is telling you he does not think he has a moat, and that is not a company either of them wants to be a shareholder in.
"And I don't know that I want to put my money in a company where the CEO is asking to be regulated, because what are you worried about? Are you really worried that an open model is going to get just as good? Because if you are, I don't want to invest in you."
Basis Points is run by Steve Fiorillo, who writes markets analysis for Seeking Alpha, and Amit Kukreja, an investor whose largest positions came up by name during the show: Nvidia, Meta and Palantir. Most of the 72 minutes is the two of them arguing about the Federal Reserve's first rate rise since 2023, and they end up on opposite sides of a question neither of them wanted to answer.
The full episode is covered here so you can skip it.
Here are the 12 arguments that matter.
Key Takeaways
Both hosts wanted to own Anthropic before this week and neither does now, because asking for regulation reads to them as an admission of no moat
"Who in their right mind asks and begs for government regulation?" is the whole objection, and they want liability rules instead of a peer-review committee
The Fed's 12-0 rise is the first since 2023, with two more penciled in for next year and a 50% chance of another in October
They agree the hike was wrong and disagree about why: one says inflation is oil and therefore transitory, the other that the Fed is signaling to Trump to end the war
"The Fed did such a disservice to America that I think all of them should be removed" — the hawkish host's verdict, delivered while defending the hike's logic
The dovish host would take 10% inflation over a recession, and could not name the inflation rate at which he would change his mind
$10.3T of government debt comes due in the next 12 months, which at the current curve adds 98 to 100 billion dollars of interest
The midterms plus a 2028 primary with no incumbent on either side is a two-year advertising windfall for Meta, Alphabet, Zeta, AppLovin and Reddit
If rates keep rising they expect money to rotate out of leveraged AI names and back into compounders with moats — McDonald's, Pepsi, Broadcom
Retail buyers who dollar-cost average every two weeks are the exit liquidity, and also the ones who benefit most when it turns
1. Apple's Siri Problem
The show opened on hardware. One host had just bought his first MacBook in 15 or 20 years, after a long stretch on PCs, and chose Apple silicon for the unified memory because of how much AI and coding work he does. He now syncs it to a Mac Mini he runs as a server, which lets him push updates to his own sites from anywhere.
The praise came with a complaint.
Apple earns its premium on hardware and is losing the assistant race
You can legitimately have the ChatGPT voice take control of your laptop or your computer and basically be your personal assistant.
Basis Points
He had upgraded his ChatGPT plan and given the voice assistant access to his email and calendars; it files appointments, sends mail and updates his to-do list. The other host is still on the waitlist for Apple's own AI version of Siri, more than a week after it was supposed to roll out.
Whoever builds the real assistant moves people between operating systems
I really think whoever wins this game of being able to actually turn your computer into a personal assistant, and you can just talk to your computer from wherever you are and have it do everything you want to do, that is the service people are going to really gravitate toward and convert PC to Mac or Mac to PC.
Basis Points
The business case they drew is a subscription. Apple built services into a hundred-billion-dollar run-rate business from nothing, and a genuinely useful assistant at five, 10 or 15 dollars a month would do it again.
They were both skeptical of the new folding iPhone. Neither sees the use case at that width — one said he would rather have a small tablet, and both said a foldable the size of a standard iPhone would have sold better. They expect the standard Pro model to carry the upgrade cycle instead, financed at zero percent over 24 months, which is how most people buy a phone.
The multiple is deserved
Apple's up 24% this year. It's an incredible company. It deserves to trade at a 31 multiple.
Basis Points
One host also plugged Micro Center, the computer retailer, which he says discounts MacBooks and has four stores in New York.
2. The Doomer Essay
The week's market story was an essay by Anthropic's chief executive, and the hosts summarized it before arguing with it.
What the essay asked for
So, Dario writes this essay, says he's really concerned about AI safety. He wants governments to get involved. He wants to pace the frontier, slow down the pace of frontier models coming out there. He thinks there's an existential threat of extinction for humanity if we don't take this seriously.
Basis Points
Sam Altman and Elon Musk agreed with him. Jensen Huang did not, and said at a summit that the industry should self-regulate rather than invite government in. Trump ruled out creating any regulatory body. Mark Zuckerberg published a reply arguing that Meta tests its own products for months before shipping and that no national regulator is needed.
One host had been saying for weeks that he wanted to buy Anthropic and thought it could be the largest company in the world. He had had a guest on who put out a public thesis that Anthropic would be the first ten-trillion-dollar company, and whose own firm spends seven figures a year on Anthropic tokens — a guest who told him one engineer now does what five used to.
The position reversed inside a week
So I no longer want to invest in Anthropic. That's a headline.
Basis Points
The objection is not about safety. It is about what asking for a regulator implies.
Nobody asks to be regulated from a position of strength
Who in their right mind asks and begs for government regulation?
Basis Points
And if the reason is that open models catch up, the company has no moat
And I don't know that I want to put my money in a company where the CEO is asking to be regulated, because what are you worried about? Are you really worried that an open model is going to get just as good? Because if you are, I don't want to invest in you.
Basis Points
What they want instead is liability, applied to companies the way it already applies to people.
Build the guardrail, and take the consequences if it fails
How about all these companies should be held to a standard? If you were an individual and you hacked a company and you got caught, you're getting sued and you're going to jail. Why is it that there are no repercussions for these companies' actions?
Basis Points
A safety review before release, not a committee afterward
Hey, if you're going to build something that's detrimental to society, you should have repercussions. How about build the guardrails and put out a product that already has a safety?
Basis Points
Their specific worry about the proposed oversight body is who sits on it. Looking at the names being floated, one host said it is largely academics from Oxford and elsewhere, with no frontier-model experience. Their other worry is that a peer-review regime means the labs hand each other their homework, which removes the differences between the models.
They also flagged the behavior around the warning. A chief executive who genuinely believed in an extinction-level risk would be at the White House the next day, not doing a fireside chat at a software conference.
The second-order risk for a shareholder is the founder himself
He wants to nationalize the product. That's a big risk. You just don't know now what's going to happen. If you are calling for the government to step in, I think that this is a ploy.
Basis Points
And the politics of it are not on the industry's side
You start asking for the government to come in — when has anybody wanted the government to regulate their business? Said nobody ever.
Basis Points
One host raised a theory circulating that Nvidia's acquisition of Hugging Face was defensive, meant to remove a potential litigant against OpenAI. The other had heard it and said it made a degree of sense, and that he would have done the same thing.
3. Meta's Victory Lap
The AI names sold off through the week and recovered on the Friday. Meta was the exception the hosts kept coming back to, and one of them had called it publicly at $526 in an article that Seeking Alpha marked an editor's pick.
The call, and where the stock is now
I told everybody that the market was wrong. They're out of their minds. It was wrong. And guess what — where are we today?
Basis Points
The answer given on air was 678, then 680 — a month and a half later. Their next level is 700.
The reason they think Meta wins the assistant race rather than Anthropic or OpenAI is distribution, and it is a business argument rather than a model-quality one.
Small and large advertisers already live inside these products
The reality is that many small businesses and medium-sized businesses and even large-scale businesses utilize Instagram and Facebook a lot, and they're probably going to pay for these tools to enhance their business. And that is something people have to understand ChatGPT and Anthropic just can't compete with, because 40 to 45% of the global population is already using Meta's products.
Basis Points
One host voiced Zuckerberg's position for him, in the first person: over a hundred billion dollars of EBITDA, revenue up 28%, and a business that does not depend on selling tokens. He also noted a private startup doing agentic text messaging was valued at $10 billion this week with no revenue and about a hundred thousand users, which he used as a comparison for what Meta's own AI product might be worth.
They flagged a near-term risk on the print.
A legal charge lands in the third quarter
Like, don't be surprised if Meta falls to 550 after Q3 earnings, because they are taking either a 10 or 12 billion legal charge this quarter.
Basis Points
The pattern they expect is the one from recent quarters: a GAAP miss on the charge, a strong normalized number, an algorithmic selloff, and a recovery within weeks.
The year-end target
I think Meta 700 end of year has a shot.
Basis Points
Their read on Zuckerberg personally is that his founder shares and his willingness to fight give him a freedom the other chief executives do not have.
4. Two Years Of Ad Money
The clearest investable idea in the episode is a calendar.
Midterm advertising money flows to the platforms
Everybody has to understand that we are going into midterms. There's going to be a lot of money flowing to advertising and serving ads. That's going to benefit Meta and that's going to benefit Alphabet.
Basis Points
The names they listed beyond those two were Zeta, AppLovin, Reddit and the older advertising companies. Then the point that makes it a two-year trade rather than a one-quarter one: the midterms run into the 2028 presidential primaries with no gap.
No incumbent on the Republican side changes the spending math
Yeah. You got the midterms and you got the presidential, and Trump is not running. So think about that. Think about how much advertising has to be done on the other side now with Republicans.
Basis Points
And neither party has a name that sells itself
There's no more Obama, there's no more Biden, there's no more Clinton. There's nobody that actually has the brand recognition of those names.
Basis Points
Both candidates, on this argument, have to buy brand recognition rather than inherit it. One host suggested plotting political ad spending over the past 20 years to see the shape of the curve, and said he expected it to be up and to the right.
5. Dreamforce And All-In
Salesforce's conference came up as a corporate event rather than a product one. The news was a raised long-term target.
The 2030 revenue guide moved
What do you mean? Salesforce increased revenue by $3 billion out to 2030. It's no longer 60, it's 63.
Basis Points
One host thinks Salesforce is undervalued and has been right on it for a year; the other agrees on the valuation and would rather own Palantir. Neither is fond of the conference itself, but both noted that Marc Benioff still gets everyone to turn up, including Jensen Huang and Anthropic's chief executive, and that he effectively shuts down part of San Francisco to do it.
Their explanation for why it felt bigger this year is distribution rather than content.
Clips on X are what made the conference mainstream
X — say what you want about Elon, but X really has changed the game for getting messages out there.
Basis Points
Nobody, they said, watches Dreamforce on YouTube; people watch the clips.
The All-In Summit came up next, and with it the episode's best self-deprecating story.
He bought a $7,500 ticket by mistake
I bought a ticket for 7500 because I thought it was 500.
Steve Fiorillo
He emailed the organizers, explained, and they refunded it — after which he decided the event would probably have been worth the money anyway. Whatever either host thinks of the All-In hosts politically, they agreed the interviews are substantive and free.
The content is the argument, not the politics
They get great interviews and there's a lot of substance and a lot of knowledge being put out there for free, and I think it's very important.
Basis Points
6. The 12-0 Hike
The Federal Reserve raised rates by a quarter point, unanimously.
What the decision actually said
Kevin Warsh raised rates, 12-0 decision. First time since 2023. Fed's calling for another two hikes next year. 50% chance of an October hike.
Basis Points
And why the committee said it did it
They cited Middle Eastern developments as the primary cause for the hike, which is basically citing — I would argue the Iran war for the increase in oil — and we are now living in a higher interest rate society.
Basis Points
Asked whether it was the right call, the dovish host said no, and gave a diagnosis rather than a complaint.
The inflation is energy, and energy is transitory
I don't like that they hiked. I don't think they needed to hike, but not because of any other reason outside of the fact that I don't think inflation is actually as aggressive as we think it is. I think inflation is transitory genuinely. I think core CPI was the lowest in five years, which means the majority of the inflation — 75% of the increase in CPI has been oil, has been energy for the past couple months, oil being the majority of that.
Basis Points
He put the blame on the administration rather than the committee, and was specific about what was given away.
The starting hand was a good one
I think Trump has really messed up his second term. I think he had a silver platter. You had gas at 2.240 in February. You had inflation at 2.4 back in December of 2024.
Basis Points
He still grants the Fed its logic, and says the danger is the next hikes
But given the Fed's mandate, I can understand their logic — anyone can understand their logic, even if we don't agree with it — and I don't think 25 bips is going to hurt the system, but I think if Trump can't get oil down and bond yields stay elevated, which they still really have over the past couple of weeks, we're going to get more hikes, and then we're fighting the Fed if we're buying stocks expecting stocks to go up.
Basis Points
7. Was The Hike Political?
The other host agreed the hike was wrong and got there by a different route, which produced the sharpest line in the episode.
A central bank is not supposed to be running foreign policy
I'm going to go a step further, and my biggest complaint right now is the Fed is almost trying to set foreign policy. They're not in a position to do that. That's the problem I have with this.
Basis Points
His account of the year is that the market started 2026 debating two or three cuts, oil went up, and the deals kept nearly happening, with crude around 63 or 64 over the July 4th weekend, before it all fell apart.
The verdict, delivered while conceding the textbook case
Textbook economics is not reality. Reality is what everyday Americans feel. And the Fed did such a disservice to America that I think all of them should be removed. Every last one of them. And I stand by that.
Basis Points
The consistency argument that followed is the strongest thing in the segment. Powell cut by 50 basis points into an election with core inflation at 3.3. This committee raised with core at 2.4.
Ninety basis points apart, and both cannot be right
Okay, so you're 90 basis points right between the two. How can both Feds be right? Either one was too tight or one was too loose. They both can't be right.
Basis Points
They disagreed about whether that makes the current committee political. One host said a 12-0 vote is a message to the president; the other pointed out that Warsh is the president's own appointee and that nine members voted for a pause six weeks earlier, so the politics do not reconcile. They ended near the same place: the hike is a signal that if the war continues and oil stays near 110, there will be more of them, and the blame will land on the White House rather than the Fed.
The numbers they traded on air were a 10-year at 4.9 and a 30-year at 5.3, with headline CPI at 3.4 and core ex energy at 2.4.
8. Jobs Or Prices
The argument underneath everything else is which half of the Fed's mandate matters more right now, and here the two hosts genuinely split.
Price changes at this level do less damage than job losses
This is the fundamental point — that whether inflation is 3%, 3 and a half%, 2 and a half% or 2%, that's not making nearly as big of a difference for average American families as a weakening labor market where people lose their jobs.
Basis Points
Pushed on where his line is, he would not draw one — and then drew one accidentally.
The line he would not defend, and defended anyway
I'd rather have 10% inflation than a recession.
Steve Fiorillo
The other host's counter was compounding: 10% a year is not a one-time price rise, it is a permanent loss of purchasing power repeated annually, and at some level the money from the job is worth nothing. He kept asking for a number, offering 4%, 5% and 7.8%, never got one, and pointed out that refusing to name a threshold is itself a position.
Which is where he put the flag back down
There, this is why inflation matters. We can't just arbitrarily be like inflation is not a thing. It matters.
Basis Points
The dovish host's own framing of the trade was a dollar figure.
He would pay it every day to keep people employed
I will pay $140 more every day if it means that people have jobs, because unemployment going up is a real cause and effect of what they're doing and what they plan on doing with the dot plot.
Basis Points
And his read on the current number is that it is not a problem yet
And right now, 3.4 is not a problem. Now, if it gets — I'll give you your satisfaction — it gets to five, 6%, we have a problem. But 3.4 is not a problem. It's just not.
Basis Points
On oil, the hawkish host is the more optimistic of the two. He expects crude back to at least 80, and cited the Energy Information Administration's forecasts of around 70 next year while calling his own view more conservative than theirs. He also pointed out that crude was at 118 a few months ago and fell 45% to 65 within a month. The dovish host's answer was that the only reason oil was down on the day was a headline about China working with Iran, and that it is still at 101.
If it does not come down, the argument is over
But if oil stays at 120 for the next two years, we are going to have massive inflation. That's undeniable, right? Oil is a huge problem.
Basis Points
9. The Refinancing Bill
The case against hiking that both hosts share is a debt-service one.
Government debt comes due into a higher curve
You raise rates, you have $10.3 trillion of government debt coming due in the next 12 months, at the current yield curve. You're going to put that debt with an additional 98 to a hundred billion dollars on the model.
Basis Points
The counter offered was that a credible Fed brings yields down, which lowers the refinancing cost — buyers return to Treasurys once they believe inflation is being handled. The reply was that the arithmetic is fixed at today's curve, whatever the market later decides.
It is a fact against the curve as it stands
Right now, the way the yield curve is, it would cause 98 to a hundred billion dollars in additional interest rates. That's a fact, on the current yield curve.
Basis Points
The private-sector version of the same problem got the longest list of the night.
The housing chain is where the rate shows up as people
You also have so many people that can't afford to buy a home. You also have the housing market that's locked up. Nobody's refiing. Builders are getting crushed. How about all the construction workers? How about all the carpenters? How about all the electricians, plumbers? People are not doing renovations. People are not tapping HELOCs to add a bathroom or add a porch.
Basis Points
The spread is the problem, not the level
You can't just have an environment for years and years and years of next to no interest rates and then just go to where the 10-year is 5% and mortgages are six and a half to seven, and corporate borrowing is 7 to 10. You can't do that after having cheap debt, because that means margins compress, that means debt compounds.
Basis Points
Neither host thinks 25 basis points does much on its own. Both think the dot plot is the problem, and one put a range on it: another 50 to 100 basis points from here.
10. Buying Into A Hike
The practical question for a listener is whether you keep buying while the Fed is tightening. Both said yes, and then spent ten minutes disagreeing about what that means in practice.
The starting point is that there is nowhere else to go
Well, the problem is there's nowhere else to put money.
Basis Points
Housing is the alternative they dismissed, with a story. One host's friend listed a house, thought his broker's asking price was absurd and wanted to fire him, then got three all-cash offers at it. That is the market today. Add 50 to 100 basis points and it changes.
Cash buyers do not replace mortgage buyers at 7 to 9%
Now you go up 50, 100 basis points, those houses right now that are 7, $800,000, $900,000 — they're going to take a haircut, because who the hell is going to put $150, $200,000 down on a house so they don't have PMI and then have interest rates on a mortgage at 7 to 9%? Nobody.
Basis Points
Rentals fare no better once you add the down payment, the tenants, lumber, rising property taxes and trade labor. Which leaves equities, bonds and money markets.
The conclusion both hosts reached
The conclusion is, so even with rate hikes, you buy stocks. You always buy stocks. It doesn't matter.
Basis Points
The 2022 objection came immediately: the S&P fell 20% that year and high-beta names fell far more, and the recovery took years. The answer is that most of the country does not experience the market that way.
Most people are not picking stocks at all
They put money in the S&P, Apple, Nvidia, and that's it. They don't want to talk about it. They're not interested. Most of America is not interested in it.
Basis Points
And retirement plans buy on a schedule, not on a view
You have to invest in the funds that your company selects for you. So once again, every two weeks people are putting into either target date funds, S&P funds, or total market funds, and that money goes into equities. But people buy every two weeks no matter what the economy is doing.
Basis Points
The more uncomfortable version of that point is who is on the other side of those purchases.
The same buyers are the exit liquidity and the eventual beneficiaries
They'll be the exit liquidity that keeps buying shares at lower prices, and then when the market rebounds they're going to benefit the most.
Basis Points
One host's own record is the caution he keeps offering.
He fought the Fed once
I fought the Fed, right? And I lost 50% of my account in 2022.
Steve Fiorillo
What he now suggests instead of buying every rally is holding some short-duration exposure paying roughly 4%, collecting the monthly distribution, and putting that capital to work after a 5% or 10% drawdown. He also cited Ed Yardeni cutting his S&P 500 target by four or five hundred points, to 7,900 from 8,300 or 8,400, as the kind of revision that should make a buyer pause. The difference from 2022, both agreed, is that this cycle has an earnings catalyst that the last one did not.
11. Away From High Beta
If rates keep rising, the rotation they expect is out of leverage and into cash flow.
The screen is compounding earnings and a moat
And if you're going to play the individual game, you buy companies with compounding earnings that have moats. And this brings me to the point that I wanted to get to about 20 minutes ago — then maybe we see a world where those types of companies, like McDonald's and Pepsi, come back and get more popular.
Basis Points
The dull names have been out of favor for a long time
But there's also great companies with great earnings that are not exciting, that have raised the dividend for years and decades and decades.
Basis Points
The example they used of an AI name whose earnings are already contracted is Broadcom.
Contracted revenue is a different risk from a story
Oh, you're telling me that Broadcom is not going to make their earnings when they already have the contracts for all the TPUs, with the largest companies with the largest cash flows? Those are the companies that'll come back in favor, and liquidity will come out of these high beta names that maybe they never deserved to get where they were.
Basis Points
On the other side, they named the debt-financed data center builders.
The convertible note is the tell
Maybe something like CoreWeave that keeps taking on debt — Nebius just did a convertible note for $3.2 billion.
Basis Points
And the volatility is exhausting holders
Dude, Nebius went from 230 to 210 this morning. That type of volatility, some people are just done with. And people are tired of it.
Basis Points
The leverage itself is what they object to
When you have funds that are 2, 3x in a single direction on a single name, what are we doing?
Basis Points
They also both noted the day's market action made no sense to them — the best session since August 4th, on a day the market should have fallen.
The close was fiscal rather than monetary.
Forty trillion dollars, and no partisan defense of it
We spend too much money as a country, and it's both parties. Both parties are to blame. This is not blame on one party or the other. I know everybody thinks I vote one way, but I'm a true independent, and both parties are to blame, and we need to get things under control.
Basis Points
Their answer to the debt was growth rather than austerity.
12. TV And Parlays
The show closed with a pop-culture segment that is a regular feature, and a confession.
The Breaking Bad homework did not get done
I said I was gonna finish season two of Breaking Bad by today and I couldn't do it.
Basis Points
The response was unforgiving — season two is a grind, everyone who writes in says it turns in season three or four, and the other host's verdict was blunt.
A sad take from a self-described TV connoisseur
It's not even bad, it's just sad that the TV connoisseur that you are can't get behind the greatest show of all time.
Basis Points
What he is actually watching is Lioness, with a theory going around that Nicole Kidman's husband is the mole, and he wants a spin-off for one of the characters.
The pitch, addressed to the network
Lioness on Paramount is so good. The cast is incredible. Taylor Sheridan. We need a Kyle spin-off.
Basis Points
Landman got recommended in return; Jack Reacher got dismissed as a cartoon. On books, one host said he does not read them any more and listens on Audible instead, mostly reading articles.
The betting talk was more revealing than the television talk.
He gave up on prediction markets after a college football loss
I lost on a prediction market last Sunday doing a stupid — I'm not doing prediction markets anymore.
Basis Points
The other had a better week, and the bets were connected.
A baseball parlay paid for the wrong Fed call
This the parlay that I did was Milwaukee, the Yankees, and the Dodgers. I did two of them, on the money line and the run line. I hit both of them. That paid for all my Fed bets.
Basis Points
They both lost money betting the Fed would not hike, along with several friends.
Bonus Insights
They both hold the same three stocks
One host's largest positions, named on air, are Nvidia, Meta and Palantir — which he called a three-stock stack. The Palantir conviction carried into the AI-safety argument, where he argued that governments will end up running their operations on a system of record and that sovereign AI is a bigger opportunity than the model layer.
The pre-show is a rap argument
The recording opens with several minutes on the greatest rap album ever made. Illmatic, Reasonable Doubt, Ready to Die and Good Kid, M.A.A.D City all get nominated, and one host makes an unpopular case for LL Cool J's GOAT. The financial content does not start until the countdown.
The show's own community is the exception to its argument
Their point about most Americans not caring about stocks came with an immediate carve-out: the people watching this show do care, buy individual names, and are exactly the ones deciding whether to fight the Fed. That is why the advice to keep buying comes with the short-duration caveat attached.
A previous guest's line kept coming back
Josh Brown's advice on the show, that you keep buying no matter how many times you have heard it, was quoted back as the counter to every market-timing argument either host made.
Their bottom line is that the hike itself is 25 basis points and harmless, the dot plot is not, and the thing to own into it is companies whose earnings are already contracted rather than companies whose valuations depend on borrowing more.
Products, Companies & Tools Mentioned
Meta (The stock one host called at $526 and is now near 680; over $100B of EBITDA, revenue up 28%, a 10 to 12 billion legal charge landing in Q3, and 40 to 45% of the global population using its products)
Anthropic (Both hosts wanted to own it before the safety essay and neither does after; the objection is that asking for regulation implies no moat)
Nvidia (A top-three position for one host; its chief executive argued at a summit for self-regulation, and the hosts discussed a theory that its Hugging Face deal was defensive)
Palantir (The third of that three-stock stack, and preferred over Salesforce; the argument is that governments adopt it as a system of record)
Apple (Up 24% on the year and, in one host's view, deserving of a 31 multiple; the complaint is Siri, and the new foldable is judged a novelty)
ChatGPT (Used as a desktop assistant with access to email and calendar — the product they say Siri should have been)
Salesforce (Raised its 2030 revenue target by $3 billion, to 63 from 60, at Dreamforce; both think it is undervalued and one would still rather own Palantir)
Alphabet, Zeta Global, AppLovin and Reddit (The other beneficiaries of two years of political ad spending through the midterms and the 2028 primaries)
Broadcom (Their example of AI exposure with contracted revenue: the TPU contracts are already signed with the largest cash-flow generators)
CoreWeave and Nebius (The debt-financed side of the trade; Nebius priced a $3.2 billion convertible note and fell from 230 to 210 in a morning)
Micro Center (A retail plug: discounted MacBooks, four New York stores, described as what CompUSA used to be)
Hugging Face (The subject of the acquisition theory one host raised about Nvidia's motives)
Books & Resources Mentioned
Seeking Alpha (Where the bullish Meta article that called the stock at $526 was published, and where it was marked an editor's pick)
The All-In Summit (The event one host accidentally bought a $7,500 ticket to; both praised the interviews as substantive and free)
Dreamforce (Salesforce's conference, which they say now reaches people through clips on X rather than through the stream itself)
The Energy Information Administration's forecasts (Cited for oil around 70 next year, a level one host said he is being more conservative than)
Yardeni Research (Its S&P 500 target cut to 7,900 from 8,300 or 8,400 was used as the example of a forecast revision worth pausing on)
Listen to the full episode
🔴 YouTube | 🔗 Episode page
Watch the full episode:
If this was worth your time, send it to someone who has to have a view on this.
Get the latest market chatter as it happens: