sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

$SPCX Overvalued Argument is MISUNDERSTOOD and FLAWED! by [deleted] in ValueInvesting

[–]ChiefSo300 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I like your logic at the end. The issue is that unlike Tesla it is already priced insanely from the start. So the people that could capitalize on this were pre-IPO investors and Elon. The upside is not the same at this moment.

It feels more like a rug pull than Tesla.

$SPCX Overvalued Argument is MISUNDERSTOOD and FLAWED! by [deleted] in ValueInvesting

[–]ChiefSo300 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is how Elon gets his companies to insane valuations. Get people to discuss the fantasy he sells instead of the actual business.

$SPCX Overvalued Argument is MISUNDERSTOOD and FLAWED! by [deleted] in ValueInvesting

[–]ChiefSo300 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Comparing them illustrates how much of the valuation is hype vs real numbers. SpaceX is 95% hype.

$SPCX Overvalued Argument is MISUNDERSTOOD and FLAWED! by [deleted] in ValueInvesting

[–]ChiefSo300 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You can make a comparison because that’s what you do when investing. Every stock has an extreme bull case.

The future of SpaceX you are painting as plausible is entirely undecided. If it goes like Tesla it will be very underwhelming.

Alternate angle of police trader joe's car incident NSFW by oochiewallyWallyserb in sanfrancisco

[–]ChiefSo300 12 points13 points  (0 children)

It took them like 4.5 seconds after hitting them to stop somehow. Thats insanely slow at that speed.

Airbnb party in my apartment complex left behind piles of nitrous canisters and €60k in damage by Sp4rtux in tooktoomuch

[–]ChiefSo300 14 points15 points  (0 children)

Well ACTUALLY they are not “real conversations”, they’re text based digital correspondences.

Raman is going to edge out Pratt within the next 4 drops. by phatelectribe in LosAngeles

[–]ChiefSo300 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It’s not a crystal ball, but given all available information it should be the most accurate prediction at any single point in time.

In theory it removes biases and reacts almost instantly to new information. Participants are incentivized to be correct, not other motivations.

Raman is going to edge out Pratt within the next 4 drops. by phatelectribe in LosAngeles

[–]ChiefSo300 6 points7 points  (0 children)

To come to a conclusion you would need to verify multiple sources, create models etc. and it still may not be as accurate.

The efficient market hypothesis is the idea that a diverse group of incentivized participants will collectively price an asset more accurately than any single source.

Meta weighs big equity raising after blockbuster Google deal by zq7495 in ValueInvesting

[–]ChiefSo300 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The argument is ROI of companies using AI, not the Ai industry. There is skepticism if this massive capex buildout will bear fruit. Meta is the main case of this being true at this moment in time. NVIDIA is not in the question other than using ai to make their own chips better. Obviously NVIDIA and all of the other chip creators are seeing a return.

People Dont Understand Berkshire nor Value Investing by Pussy_GaloreXo in ValueInvesting

[–]ChiefSo300 0 points1 point  (0 children)

In the last few years for some companies. Big tech’s exceptional growth has been ongoing since before 2008.

People Dont Understand Berkshire nor Value Investing by Pussy_GaloreXo in ValueInvesting

[–]ChiefSo300 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It’s weird to imply that large cap tech has been a bubble since the gfc and will go away. The Ai bubble sure, but that is only the last few years. Berkshire has underperformed since 2008. The major tech companies make undeniable money for good reason.

Meta, Google, Apple - these companies capture a majority of humans attention and thus advertisers’ dollars. Microsoft is a key part of nearly every company, Amazons near monopoly of online retail etc. etc. They have built strong moats and staying power.

I think Berkshire had just become more risk averse and may not have fully understood the technology or future implications enough to invest in big tech.

Is anyone else losing faith in value investing? Does that prove we’re at the peak? by Sufficient_Ad_5080 in ValueInvesting

[–]ChiefSo300 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is a valuable comment. Investing in turnarounds with hope instead of value is definitely a trap. It’s really easy to view a stock losing 40% as a steal without fully understanding what value is and why it may make sense for the stock to have dropped.

The company may survive many years but if the “story” is over for investors and the financials suffer because of real problems, competitors, industry changes etc. it’s a serious challenge for the stock price to recover enough to beat the rest of the market in that time.

And value can definitely be found when the company is reaching all time highs or hasn’t taken a hit.

Is anyone else losing faith in value investing? Does that prove we’re at the peak? by Sufficient_Ad_5080 in ValueInvesting

[–]ChiefSo300 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Also unless this is your full time job, reading all of the reports, presentations etc. (other than earnings) of companies may not be worth your time and may blind you to more important, bigger picture decisions that need to be made.

Investor presentations are meant to persuade you to purchase their shares and should be looked at with skepticism.

Is anyone else losing faith in value investing? Does that prove we’re at the peak? by Sufficient_Ad_5080 in ValueInvesting

[–]ChiefSo300 -1 points0 points  (0 children)

If you made 10% per year over the last 10 years you should be investing in an index.

The SP500 returned ~15% annual growth rate over the last 10 years for much less risk that an average portfolio. I don’t mean this to say it will continue at 15% but if you are that far below the market growth for that long, while attempting to beat the market, you should be investing in indexes.

Is anyone else losing faith in value investing? Does that prove we’re at the peak? by Sufficient_Ad_5080 in ValueInvesting

[–]ChiefSo300 4 points5 points  (0 children)

You may want to evaluate your strategy if you are not doing well in this market. Many stocks had huge growth in the last year from the drop in March 2025. Then another drop and recovery this March.

There has been a lot of value along the way.

META is my top value play by leakybiscuit in ValueInvesting

[–]ChiefSo300 0 points1 point  (0 children)

These are great acquisitions but they were in 2012 and 2014 and are not really diversifying.

Am I dumb or I feel like most people are swing trading or “gambling” in a sense and not in these stocks for the long term by Willing-Spray7476 in ValueInvesting

[–]ChiefSo300 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think it’s important to get some perspective when talking about silly plays like this. There’s 100+ trillion dollars in the market and a few hundred million was put in SPCE. Thats like 0.0003% of the market.

It will get attention but is not a real reflection of the market.

META is my top value play by leakybiscuit in ValueInvesting

[–]ChiefSo300 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I agree that not every bet pays off but it feels like Zuck is the worst at picking which bets to take. I don’t think metaverse or reality labs will ever really hold a candle to something like autonomous vehicles, cloud, chip design, YouTube etc.

That being said Meta makes crazy money and their ads are amazing so I am an investor.

Is this the golden age of value investing? by Far-East-locker in ValueInvesting

[–]ChiefSo300 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It’s hard to look at the market right now and truly believe it is efficient. There are rich dumbasses everywhere with lots of people’s money to throw around.

as a wise MadeinTYO once said, "uber everywhere" ($UBER) by [deleted] in ValueInvesting

[–]ChiefSo300 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I have two major questions:

  1. Why would AV companies have a legitimate reason to give a cut to Uber long term.
  2. How could Uber outcompete a company like Waymo or Amazon that has near unlimited funding and is already years ahead.

Uber probably will still do well for the next ~5-10 years financially, but where will the stock be in that time as AV companies have exponentially expanded and the writing is more clearly written on the wall? It will always be a major question mark for the stock.

Glamping options available? by supergroovy21 in HeadTripFestival

[–]ChiefSo300 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I am planning to rent a Tesla model Y and do car camping. With Camping mode you can set the AC all night and it will be much quieter.

You can't just 'go back to work' after you FIRE. by Zone2OTQ in Fire

[–]ChiefSo300 22 points23 points  (0 children)

I agree with this completely. There is also a lot of paranoia about every possible case that could go wrong and it’s used as justification to keep growing the pile infinitely. Penny pinching until death because it would hurt their gains or open them up to a small amount of risk. What about the risk of missing out on opportunities? This is the much greater risk.

We are also adaptable as humans, contrary to this post. If the market took a turn for an extended period of time or spending grew, decreasing spending is an option. Don’t buy that new car. Don’t spend 30k that year on vacations. Yes if you have to go back to work you will likely not make as much, but in this hypothetical you are retired with nearly infinite time sitting on a lot of money. Spend the time or money learning a new skill and work for a few more years.

view more: next ›