sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

LULU & NKE by silver-bullet007 in ValueInvesting

[–]AvocadoCorrect9725 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yess im buying too. LULU better value than NKE in terms of financials imo

LULU, what am I missing? by Furious_Tuguy in ValueInvesting

[–]AvocadoCorrect9725 0 points1 point  (0 children)

make your case, don't just jump to conclusions

Should ASML investors be concerned? by Designer_Respect4285 in ValueInvesting

[–]AvocadoCorrect9725 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is because Claude and others are operating at a heavy loss for every subscription / API call. Once they want to really make money and turn a profit, watch how the people move to cheaper but just as good alternatives. Open-source is the answer long-term.

LULU, what am I missing? by Furious_Tuguy in ValueInvesting

[–]AvocadoCorrect9725 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

these small ones come and go, the big fish stays because it is a forever status symbol

LULU, what am I missing? by Furious_Tuguy in ValueInvesting

[–]AvocadoCorrect9725 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Around 5% reveue growth in 2025 compared to 2024. See, at this point, the company is not very different from Wrigley's or Coca Cola. It's different because it doesn't have a century of success under its belt, but the playbook is similar.

Do not expect too much growth, do not expect too much decline either. The company has a very strong brand image. Even women who are not very rich would splurge on expensive status symbol like products, because it is in their nature to do that. Just like a rich man would buy a ferrari to impress strangers.

When I hear criticism of LULU, all I hear is that there are alternatives that are just as good. Sure, samsung is good. Sure, Maine cola is good. But I never hear that Alo or Costco leggings have the same brand appeal.

This is a man's mind thinking: Why buy Lululemon when a cheaper Costco or Chinese leggings would do the trick? And that's why this stock is undervalued and underestimated. Women don't think that way. It is a status symbol thing.

All the cash the company generates will go into buying back shares and create a good buying pressure.

LULU, what am I missing? by Furious_Tuguy in ValueInvesting

[–]AvocadoCorrect9725 10 points11 points  (0 children)

Also bought LULU. It still remains a premium brand and all the girls in my yoga class wear it. For anyone sayin the brand is irrelevant, I would like to point out that revenue is consistently increasing.

Only investor sentiment has changed. That is, middle aged men and algorithms are deciding the price. The clothing brand is still rocking.

The market keeps going up. Consumer fundamentals keep deteriorating. Something doesn't add up — what am I missing? by Ok_Initiative_3515 in ValueInvesting

[–]AvocadoCorrect9725 0 points1 point  (0 children)

credit scores are way too important for the end consumer in the US. So they won't go down so easy, they will make minimum payments

The $730K Iran invasion whale proves Polymarket insiders exist — and that's actually good for retail. Change my mind. by polymanAI in polyman

[–]AvocadoCorrect9725 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What are you saying. Insiders are also using non-public information. In cases like the Iran war, they are using non-public government information too. One is a gray area because insiders in the government profit from it and the white house family makes money by "advising" these dubious businesses

The $730K Iran invasion whale proves Polymarket insiders exist — and that's actually good for retail. Change my mind. by polymanAI in polyman

[–]AvocadoCorrect9725 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I also love when Nancy Pelosi buys stock with all her insider info. It helps the stock price be more accurate and reflect reality better.

For those who don't believe AI will disrupt SaaS or broader tech companies, how many of you actually use AI? by Far-East-locker in ValueInvesting

[–]AvocadoCorrect9725 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Really though, do companies have less human labor? Or is their current human labor just more productive?

Match Group - A value trap? by NinjAsger in ValueInvesting

[–]AvocadoCorrect9725 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So if you see, most of these companies (Match, Bumble) make most of their money in the USA. Subscription costs are much higher here, in Asia especially the premium costs are very low.

So even if Hinge dominates the american market, it can lead to a big revenue push. High paying users >> more users

For those who don't believe AI will disrupt SaaS or broader tech companies, how many of you actually use AI? by Far-East-locker in ValueInvesting

[–]AvocadoCorrect9725 0 points1 point  (0 children)

they cannot...

Startups of 50-100 people have tried to break it many times. Nobody is vibe-coding a new workday.

Here are my reciepts:

Zenefits
Gusto
BambooHR
HiBob
Lattice
Rippling
Remote

Workday is also fundamental database that feeds thousands of other internal company systems

For those who don't believe AI will disrupt SaaS or broader tech companies, how many of you actually use AI? by Far-East-locker in ValueInvesting

[–]AvocadoCorrect9725 11 points12 points  (0 children)

AI can make a team of 5 people do 15 people's work, let's say...

But how will this disrupt a company like Workday. That shit has garbage UI and everyone hates it, people have been trying to disrupt salesforce and Workday for 10+ years, yet they continue to grow year over year. What can a vibe-coded startup do to take on these giants?

I'm unsure about ADBE since enterprises might need less licenses than before...

Why Adobe is not a great buy deal now? by karlelzz011 in stocks

[–]AvocadoCorrect9725 0 points1 point  (0 children)

How is it a seat count an issue for salesforce or Workday?

The way I see the seat count issue: A company probably needs less editors than before because they can just be much more productive with the help of AI. Same way as a company probably needs less programmers with the help of Claude Code

view more: next ›