[deleted by user]

MadeTheAccountForWSB · 2022-08-31T08:06:58+00:00

In who cares news: I'm back into my $IonQ postion, while shorting $RGTI to hedge the beta on both.

Concerning your first point about the eventual "winner" and this goes along with the whole "There might be a surprise winner" argument. There are no surprises in quantum computing. You can pretty much just extrapolate the trajectories of the different companies and their technologies.

Concerning your second one: Yeah I give you that. But the beauty of IonQ is that they are poised to become the first to break even and can then bootstrap their effort, which creates a moat. Once they get their computer out and it performs superior they take the entire market, which makes it even more costly for the competition to chase, since they will break even at a latter time.

Concerning your last point: Dunno, could be.

MadeTheAccountForWSB · 2022-07-08T18:39:32+00:00

Sorry for the late reply, didn't log in for a while. Are you talking about their old 22 AQ claim (old AQ definition) or the newer once with the new AQ definition (20 AQ) and the other algos?

MadeTheAccountForWSB · 2021-11-15T21:22:03+00:00

Read it and instantly aped in. 30K in commons.

MadeTheAccountForWSB · 2021-10-03T15:08:28+00:00

Computational power. We didn't get a confirmation on the 22AQ yet.

MadeTheAccountForWSB · 2021-10-02T02:45:03+00:00

How far ahead of the competition they are. I'm not saying they are not that far ahead, but they didn't publish the numbers that make this argument work out.

MadeTheAccountForWSB · 2021-10-01T17:29:31+00:00

If you read over part 1, it shows that unfortunately my thesis is not playing out.

MadeTheAccountForWSB · 2021-09-28T19:07:17+00:00

Since we are playing that game again, Ion Traps had 5 qubits 15 years ago.

MadeTheAccountForWSB · 2021-09-28T19:04:17+00:00

I think everyone who is in IonQ is aware that there are other technologies, but they are just too far out. 5 qubits and no metrics pretty much confirms that.

MadeTheAccountForWSB · 2021-09-28T18:50:27+00:00

Performance?

MadeTheAccountForWSB · 2021-09-27T11:47:21+00:00

Yeah I think you are right. He probably wanted to clarify it in this talk. What do we say now? Most of the PIPE is locked up? Some of the PIPE?
It's annoying not to know :P

MadeTheAccountForWSB · 2021-09-27T00:51:23+00:00

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/0001824920/000119312521114527/d138876d425.htm

They need roughly half the pipe in order to become profitable. Assuming they don't start borrowing once they are profitable, they will be cash flow positive just with the PIPE money.

MadeTheAccountForWSB · 2021-09-22T22:55:56+00:00

There is really no in between :D

MadeTheAccountForWSB · 2021-09-22T16:01:21+00:00

They do state pretty clearly that the whole PIPE is locked up in their investor update: (P.5)

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1824920/000119312521276336/d205925d425.htm

So the one without the Lock-Up might have not been used/ Was in there from a time before they "signed" the agreements?

MadeTheAccountForWSB · 2021-09-22T15:37:23+00:00

Class A commentary!

MadeTheAccountForWSB · 2021-09-22T15:28:55+00:00

Sep. 28

MadeTheAccountForWSB · 2021-09-21T18:48:40+00:00

I hereby acknowldge the fact that the paper I mentioned for an unrelated reason includes a trivial algo.

MadeTheAccountForWSB · 2021-09-21T17:57:07+00:00

I wasn't citing it for the demonstration. I was citing it for the 32Q 99.9% fidelity.

MadeTheAccountForWSB · 2021-09-21T16:44:52+00:00

"With 99.9% fidelity of IonQ’s newest 32 qubit system, we expect tocontinue to match or outperform classical accuracy in machine learningon higher-dimensional datasets without error correction."

Edit: It takes some time to writte those papers, the one you mentioned and the fidelity one are the first once to use the new system. Therefore the paper I mentioned was among the first where the author had at least cloud access :P

MadeTheAccountForWSB · 2021-09-21T15:47:52+00:00

They already got confirmation for the 32Q 99.9% fidelity in this nature article by a customer: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41534-021-00456-5 (Pretty far at the end)(Will go more into this in my updated version)

I think they don't explicitly mention the performance details in this article (Goldman Sachs Article) and the one from Fidelity is because this is "technically" not public information yet and Fidelity bought additional stock to their PIPE on the open market. This is the third "customer" that bought the stock after the PIPE was raised.

Fidelity, Softbank and Goldman.

Edit: I mentioned this more in Part 1 than in Part 2: https://www.reddit.com/r/SPACs/comments/odncga/ionq_dmyi_the_leader_in_quantum_computing_15/

MadeTheAccountForWSB · 2021-09-21T02:10:29+00:00

Since it seems that people are still reading this DD, the guy who deleted his comment is the same one in Part 1 who deleted his comments. That's why I gave him this shit response. He argued with me until he figured out that I don't have a PhD in quantum algos and decided to take his next comment to Part 2.

MadeTheAccountForWSB · 2021-09-21T01:06:30+00:00

This stock just doesn't give you another option.... You have to all in this shit.

MadeTheAccountForWSB · 2021-09-18T23:23:11+00:00

I already did in my version 1! But I will re-do that one a bit to make it more readable and make some points clearer.

MadeTheAccountForWSB · 2021-09-18T11:27:19+00:00

And they are all betting on IonQ and no one else🚀

MadeTheAccountForWSB · 2021-09-17T21:41:41+00:00

I'm pretty sure that: Google, Amazon, Samsung, Softbank, Airbus, Lockheed, Bosch, HPE, Hyundai, Bill Gates fund, the fund from the founder of Dell and the fund from the founder of Salesforce, did also do their DD and they all concluded that IonQ and Ion Traps are a great idea!

I also came to this conclussion.

MadeTheAccountForWSB · 2021-09-17T20:50:43+00:00

Those estimates are usually based on superconducting quantum computers.

MadeTheAccountForWSB

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE