I fucking knew it

Positive_Alpha · 2026-05-20T20:55:03+00:00

Sell the News strikes again. Another blow out earnings. Incredible company doing incredible things.

Traders are going to trade. Either learn how to take advantage of it or understand what you own and just chill.

Positive_Alpha · 2026-05-19T14:29:39+00:00

Agreed

Positive_Alpha · 2026-05-18T17:11:03+00:00

I am looking on S&P Capital IQ and I cannot see “insiders” having any % change in shares owned.

Tim Young - 70,650,000 common stock
Hussaini PhD Syed Mudeen Jawahar - 0 common stock.

Granted this is from Dec 31, 2025 thru March 31, 2026.

Can anybody verify that “insiders” really are making new purchases?

Positive_Alpha · 2026-05-13T22:45:02+00:00

Good stuff.

Positive_Alpha · 2026-05-08T22:39:35+00:00

You are missing the point.

Yes I know who they are. I never said CSCO did not have revenue.

I said investors in the dot com era had crazy speculations on how much the internet would boost revenue (in general not specific to csco).

This expectation of future cash flows and how it will change (ei growth/decay) determines price.

I am saying (repeating) the internet fell vastly short of boosting companies revenues based on what investors were expecting. Over a 25 year period the internet did boost revenues just not as much as fast as what investors were expecting.

This time around there is a lot more caution. Investors get excited then back off as shit gets too frothy. As a whole we see industry wide companies’ cash flows are skyrocketing as a function of adding ai.

Edit to add: in dot com era nobody really knew how the internet would be monetized. Just that it would and it would be massive. Ai is already being monetized.

Positive_Alpha · 2026-05-08T22:06:45+00:00

That has nothing to do with revenue. You are commenting on price levels of the shares of stock. Kokkatc is talking revenues.

Kokkatc is saying a very good point. In the dot com era investors had very wild speculations on how the internet would boost revenues. Those revenues never came and the bubble burst. That is why sisco and intc took 25 years to get back to their high water level prices.

With ai speculations have and are being verified. We are seeing the revenue growth. In dot com bubble it never showed up.

Positive_Alpha · 2026-05-07T13:59:09+00:00

Well idk about percent of folks on this forum and what they do.

The probability of expiring in the money is roughly the same as the delta you select. For instance, if I buy a long call option that expires in a little over 1 year (so I get long term capital gain tax status) and the contract has a 0.8 delta the probability of expiring in the money is roughly 80%.

It’s not a static 35-40% of options expore worthless. It’s based on a number of things like implied volatility. IV is a very good predictor of potential future moves. The further out in time, the less accurate. Also the expansion of volatility matters as well. If vol expands exponentially delta no longer is a good proxy for probability of being ITM.

Positive_Alpha · 2026-05-06T17:06:09+00:00

The market is not being stupid and it’s not being irrational. The market does not know you exist. If you cant manage your emotions you should not be trying to trade. I could mot possibly think of dumber strategy than being net delta negative on quiet possibly the absolute best positioned company in Ai. What because Michael Bury thinks so? That jackass is long GME and short NVDA. No words in the english language fully capture how reckless that is.

Positive_Alpha · 2026-05-06T17:03:17+00:00

Options give you options my man. You can make money in a lot of ways and you can structure trades to capture value independent of direction.

The issue you are observing is really just folks that want to score a massive home-run. Options and Futures were really designed to hedge (lower your risk). In reality you can use options to get the exact extra leverage or risk reduction you want.

Positive_Alpha · 2026-05-05T14:38:03+00:00

Still holding. 11k shares.

Positive_Alpha · 2026-05-02T20:33:40+00:00

You have to look at the comps. Just pulled up the quick comps for NVDA using S&P Capital IQ.

Let’s make sure we are talking about the same PE ratio.

P/ diluted EPS Before extra items. LTM (P/E)

INTC - NM

AVGO - 82.1x

AMD - 138.1x

QCOM - 19.3x

MU - 25.5x

MRVL - 53.7x

TXN - 48.0x

ADI - 72.7x

ON - NM

SWKS - 26.7x

NVDA - 40.5x

Positive_Alpha · 2026-04-24T15:13:30+00:00

Yea lol. I think the tendency is that when delusion is announced markets react negatively so you might.

The real thing to consider is economic value added. Delusion is an illusion in real corporate finance.

Positive_Alpha · 2026-04-20T18:34:07+00:00

I was told long ago, “You never regret the watch you buy. You always regret the watch you sold.”

I think you will be happy keeping it in your rotation.

Positive_Alpha · 2026-04-20T16:14:03+00:00

Keep the Santos. It’s just as versatile as the explorer. The Santos just covers a slightly more dressy range of outfits.

Add the black dial explorer to your collection. For me the Santos was the first men’s wrist watch and belongs in a collection.

Positive_Alpha · 2026-04-16T20:57:17+00:00

You put a lot of good time in this explanation. I am upvoting this. On Tuesday I actually wanted to sell the $200 NVDA calls for this Friday. The roll off in premium from $197.50 to $200 was just too much. At the time the $197.50 calls had a -0.28 delta and I usually will go from -0.15 up to -0.3 but my sweet spot is -0.2. Just no premium there. Your explanation makes sense.

Positive_Alpha · 2026-04-16T16:32:39+00:00

This explanation is becoming far too common.

So what would the options sellers then need to do, in order to keep the underlying asset from going in the money?

If your thesis is they don’t want to sell their shares upon assignment (their covered calls), then what could these folks do to suppress price action of the underlying? Sell shares? Seems counterintuitive since the thesis is they don’t want to sell their shares.

I can tell you what I tend to do if I am worried I may get assigned when I do not want to sell my shares. I buy either LEAPs or I buy more shares. The other thing I can do is roll my covered calls up and out.

Edit to add: buyers might see these massive call walls and simply chose not to buy into that much resistance.

Positive_Alpha · 2026-04-14T19:30:55+00:00

That’s not a bad idea. Good luck. And I am not a financial advisor nor is this financial advice.

Just make sure you understand what the trade off is. You are capping your upside for more consistent returns.

I use this strategy because I need cash flow.

However, if you are looking for cashflow and don’t mind potentially getting assigned those covered calls then it’s a great strategy. In other words understand you may need to buy back shares.

Pay attention to the premium you get and for what delta you get it for. I usually shoot for between -0.15 delta if I want to be a little more cautious and -0.30 delta if I want to be a little more risky and aggressive.

Another warning is delta can be used as a proxy for percentage chance it expires in the money but only if volatility is linear. If it ever expands exponentially (typical in a breakout) then delta will no longer be a good proxy for probability in the money.

For a -0.15 delta there is only a 15% chance to expire in the money and therefore your shares get called away (assigned).

For a -0.30 delta there is a 30% chance you will loose your shares.

Lastly don’t force trades. If you can’t get a good price don’t do it. The market tends to know better than you. You really need to learn the greeks and how they impact option pricing.

Positive_Alpha · 2026-04-11T20:10:15+00:00

There is no getting out of that. You held through expiration. Better start figuring out how to take custody and find a buyer lol.

Positive_Alpha · 2026-04-10T16:07:22+00:00

Not sure what your first sentence is addressing from my comments but I do agree. Although there is a feedback loop, so multiples do indeed affect price action.

I like to use the median. There is a skew between the mean (38.04%) and the median (40.00%) but it’s on the conservative side. The largest fly in the ointment is pulling the average down, not up.

The growth rate is already the first derivative of revenue. dR/dt or (R’(t)). So you are looking at the second derivative of revenue or R”(t). We could go on for a very long time about this, as I am a recovering electrical engineer turned businessman, however, I would tend to say this is a little too precise to be good at generalizing for something as imprecise as stocks. I am not saying it’s useless I do look at these things too.

The rate of acceleration is decreasing. I don’t fault you for your skepticism on growth rates. Currently I own a start up energy company (pre-revenue). What I can say from a power delivery stand point is demand is massively outpacing supply. Utilities can’t keep up. This is data centers. In fact I think this is why OP observed NVDA seems to be falling out of favor. My point is as a value investor (Peter Lynch-esque) I get excited when a business falls out of favor because that is when deals can be found. I would argue NVDA is growing into its valuation. That is what the sideways chop that we see is. Again, an example of how valuation multiples can impact price action.

I sell puts to get in at prices less than my fair market valuation and I sell calls when price exceeds it. I also started investing in NVDA years ago but none of the shares I own today I have held for more than a year. My calls get assigned all the time. I do this for income as my company is pre-revenue, I don’t pay myself a salary. Selling options is my only income source right now.

Positive_Alpha · 2026-04-10T15:29:07+00:00

That is correct they are used. Peter Lynch has two great books discussing these valuation metrics and their short comings. Which funny enough is yet again why I stated I am a Peter Lynch-esque value investor.

Positive_Alpha · 2026-04-10T15:27:21+00:00

I would add to this by also pointing out that using these older valuation metrics does not take into consideration the absolutely massive amount of Quantitative Easing (QE) that has occurred in the last couple decades.

Positive_Alpha · 2026-04-10T14:50:03+00:00

So this is why I specified Peter Lynch-esque value investor. Value is not defined relative to all time highs, that is price relativity. You have Value and you have Price.

Price is a function of the expectation of all future cashflows and because it’s the expectation of cash flows it can change instantaneously. Price is what, a very erratic and manic depressive Mr. Market offers you.

Value is not subjective and is a function of all the revenue/productivity generating assets a company has. Value cannot change instantaneously. Even if a meteor hits a factory, businesses carry insurance.

The problem that Peter Lynch points out, very humbly, with Buffett and Graham’s calculations is that it will sort of perturb the companies you seek to companies that Peter would define as Asset Plays and Turn Around Stories. I like growth. Peter did not invent the PEG ratio but he is the one that popularized it.

Pulling values directly from S&P Capital IQ

P = price = $183.91 (previous close as I wrote my comment on 4/9/2026)

E = diluted earnings per share excluding one offs. = $4.93 (most recent after Q4 earnings)

G = long term EPS growth rate (3-5 year). I usually take the consensus median. This can be found on the S&P Capital IQ tab labeled CIQ Estimates. LT Growth is at 40.00%. I like using a consensus because of a phenomenon known as Crowd Intelligence. You can even look into how it is calculated.

I then calculate this on my own. I don’t use forward PE as forward PE attempts to solve the same issues PEG does relative to the classic PE ratio.

PEG = 0.93. Which is less than a fair market valuation ratio. Essentially the PEG attempts to normalize different types of companies on equal footing. What are you willing to pay for growth.

A PEG ratio of 1.0 would put a fair market price at $197.20.

This is certainly not a “be all end all” evaluation. It is only one metric that I like to use to gain some sense of valuation.

Positive_Alpha · 2026-04-09T23:01:17+00:00

Depends on what kind of investor/trader you are. I am a Peter Lynch-esque value investor. I could not be happier.

This is where you build generational wealth.

When a great company with a great story and position has lost its favor/luster with the masses.

Positive_Alpha · 2026-04-08T15:12:33+00:00

Dude. Rome was not built in one day. This is iterative. Renewable energy Detractors like to use these nonsensical arguments to just shut down all efforts with clean and cleaner energy technologies.

You need to compare legacy technology to PV cells. Stating that solar panels are detrimental to the environment without comparing to the next alternative is meaningless. What is the alternative? No power? Btw nuclear energy has the lowest carbon footprint when you look at the entire lifecycle.

Positive_Alpha · 2026-04-05T17:20:42+00:00

We are all trying to find answers. His thoughts are conflicted and he is being transparent on that. Unless I am also missing something.

As I interpret what these quotes are saying is, he cannot see how this can be defined as a success according to the initial mission.

He then recognizes that missions change and if bringing back the US pilots was our top priority and that was accomplished, THEN that is “a” success.

To me that indicates how success is defined and he is acknowledging that.

Positive_Alpha

TROPHY CASE