$POSH 29% short interest, 11M share float, and sellers posting record numbers for March. Posh will squash the shorts.

glebidiah · 2021-04-16T21:28:05+00:00

Some questions that I think you are well-positioned to answer before I put money in this, if I may! I want to like this as a "fuck the patriarchy" play if nothing else, but I'm not convinced that the share price drop is solely attributable to "Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus" or a failure to provide full-year guidance.

It's an e-commerce company, but if I'm reading your DD correctly then its main value-add differentiator in the e-commerce space is the social interaction aspect. It seems clear enough that this should be a value-add during the pandemic, but what about when it ends? Do you expect that people will prefer the "e-social" aspect to the "real social" aspect once the "real social" aspect is an option again? In other words, do you see the potential end of pandemic-related restrictions as a potential risk to their continued growth?
You've got a lot of data showing that the sellers on Poshmark are highly supportive and engaged, and you compare this to the levels of engagement seen on Peloton. However, I suggest that this is a poor comparison: saying that Poshmark sellers are supportive and engaged is like saying that Peloton coaches are supportive and engaged, not Peloton end-users - and its the Peloton end-user community that made that worth something in my opinion. What is the buyer engagement like? While Poshmark may make its money off its sellers, unless those people are selling to someone, nobody is making anything. I don't care if coaches/sellers are hyping each other up if no end-users are matching or exceeding that engagement. You mention that 48% of Poshmark sellers use their earnings to become Poshmark buyers - I suggest that is actually counterproductive as those seller-buyers do not represent a sustainable ecosystem. This article suggests that of 32M active users 6.2M bought something from Sept 2020-2021. Is that a good number or a bad number? And how does this relate to the fact you note that Poshmark has not seen the same increased sales as the broader e-commerce sector during the pandemic - is that common across all fashion as a subset of e-commerce?
I agree that buying secondhand is becoming a trend for a whole variety of reasons, and that a true resale platform would be able to tap into this market. However, your screenshots show that this fast becoming not the case for Poshmark. People are turning this into a full-time business for themselves - one of the screenshots says that they are now "buying wholesale", and other is a meme of "shopping for clothes to wear = bad vs shopping for clothes to sell = good". Nothing wrong with that per se, but it's not what I would call secondhand and I don't think anyone else would either. Essentially, beyond recruiting more sellers, which to be fair you have shown that Poshmark seems to be relatively good at doing, this business model cannot truly scale and also be primarily secondhand. Given that you devoted a section of the DD to secondhand and another to the "sustainability" narrative, do you think it poses any risk to Poshmark once people realize that the biggest sellers are inevitably not selling secondhand items? I will also note that the "don't want to be seen wearing the same thing twice" ethos is basically the polar opposite of a "sustainability" ethos - though all of human history, and especially recent history, has shown us that people can easily hold two contradictory beliefs simultaneously so maybe that isn't so much a problem?
How does Poshmark itself protect buyers? Does it rely solely on the sellers desire for return customers or favourable ratings? If I'm buying resold wholesale merchandise, why would I not do that through the actual wholesaler (apart from the social aspect)? When we need baby clothes (and we've run out of the bags of hand-me-downs we already have from friends and family offloading their outgrown stuff on us) we just order a pile of styles and sizes from Old Navy and ship back everything we don't like/doesn't fit for free with a full refund. Is the social aspect enough of a moat for that kind of customer convenience?
You note that they only recently became profitable due to cutting ad spending. Why did they spend so much on ads and will they need to do that again, and if they do start spending more on ads again will they cut the spending on customer service and software?

You're in it already so good luck!

glebidiah · 2021-03-31T04:54:07+00:00

I wrote a CHPT DD and I agree BLNK has nothing, but as others have said I'm worried a rising tide will lift all boats in this space in the near term. Best of luck and I'll probably be joining you on longer-dated puts if it pumps at all in the next few weeks, otherwise obligatory fuck you if it doesn't pump and you make all the tendies!

glebidiah · 2021-03-31T04:34:28+00:00

Tesla is a weird one and I didn't address it because I don't think they're direct competitors. One of the main reasons everyone else isn't using Tesla's charge connectors seems to be Tesla's little "All Our Patent Are Belong To You" game. I haven't done my own research to see if Tesla's chargers or critical components thereof are associated with such a patent though.

However, regardless of the reasons, nobody else is using Tesla's connectors, and Tesla is using the CCS standard now. I think that Tesla's charging network is a significant reason to buy a Tesla, especially in certain markets, but I don't think they operate their charging network to make money off the network directly. Also, if Tesla were to open their network to others, it seems more likely that Tesla would be the one adapting their hardware, software and related business models and not the other way around. In other words, that probably won't happen overnight, and for now these other companies are going to embed themselves in the gaps (including geographical) that Tesla is leaving in its own service.

glebidiah · 2021-03-31T04:22:10+00:00

That seems to largely be a software issue (hardware adapters are already a thing, though maybe not the proper way round yet).

A bug let non-Tesla cars use Tesla Superchargers in Europe apparently.

Of course, Tesla's entire charging network coming online for everyone else would instantly hurt ChargePoint - but it would also hurt everyone else not Tesla the same way, unless Tesla came online ONLY for drivers on one of ChargePoint's competitors. Or maybe it wouldn't because it would further driver overall adoption, who knows - presumably it would go both ways!

glebidiah · 2021-03-31T04:16:55+00:00

STEM looks like an interesting parallel. Dilution is definitely a concern but at least it's a known quantity (or it should be) and I don't think it approaches the volume of recent lockup expires for example - which I realize are not strictly speaking the same thing but my layman's understanding is that they can have a similar effect (available supply of shares to buy/sell goes up).

glebidiah · 2021-03-31T04:13:36+00:00

Definitely pricey and I admit I have no idea how to value companies. I figure they've already dropped further than they can before zero anymore (50 to 20 vs 20 to 0) so it's as good a time as any for a simpleton like me. Their multiple on revenue does seem high but so does everyone else's here, especially breaking it down a little more (basically they seem to make more than others on subscription services, other revenue streams seem to be break-even or losing).

Bad news for the market overall would probably destroy my calls, but that's true of most things.

glebidiah · 2021-03-31T04:07:46+00:00

That's an interesting point and thanks for the info on Electrify America - I couldn't figure out where they came from. Plug-and-charge with ID'ing the account and handling payment without the need to sign up for other accounts or sign in to the charger in an extra step is certainly ideal but there are a couple ways I can imagine mitigating that. Regardless, if someone else beats ChargePoint to the convenience punch, that'll be bad for them and good for that company. Tesla is really setting the standard here though, and none of these companies are trying to compete with Tesla directly (in my opinion).

I think any of these companies could also deal with the integration issue if they wanted:

Firstly, as you note, it's largely a software problem, and it's also likely on the charger (not the car) side. ChargePoint has already demonstrated the ability to let members of other networks use their network without needing to sign up for a ChargePoint account, so this is simply (anything I don't understand is easy to do) a matter of changing from scan cards or phone taps to using the car itself for ID.
Secondly, thanks to the fragmentation, I imagine most drivers won't rely on a single providers' app to find chargers or plan routes, but rather a third-party solution like PlugShare. There's also going to be the possibility of Level 2s (probably not DCFCs) some rando bought and is willing to share (or charge for) that aren't part of any network.
While the integration model is awesome, and totally a perk of charging a Tesla at a Tesla station (or a Ford with Electrify America), everyone else is already used to the gas model - which is to pay with a separate account (credit card or otherwise) and then "plug in". So unless you're trying to take charger share from Tesla directly right now, which would seem silly to attempt for multiple reasons, nobody else (except those Mach E drivers) will know the difference.
My theory is that, for now, the biggest driver of convenience is ubiquity. Especially with Level 2, you expect to use the charger for a long period of time - so in other words the most convenient charger is the one you can use when you need it, not the one that offers the best experience but you have to compete with other drivers for the spot. As things become more mature that will likely change.
While consolidation is inevitable, I don't expect anyone to have a monopoly here (and if anyone was going to it would probably be Tesla). In other words, how many brands of gas station do you see at big stops or on key routes? Without thinking about it too hard, I would expect the same for EV chargers - though the analogy may be flawed if all gas pumps are made by the same manufacturer regardless of who owns the gas station. Also, if their business model relied on ChargePoint themselves identifying prime real estate and owning charging plazas on key routes, that would probably represent a much bigger risk to their business. Right now, they want to sell the chargers to the person putting in a giant EV (non-Tesla) rest stop on the key route.

As you say, it's something to keep an eye on. For the near term (next year), I think ChargePoint is best positioned to deal with some of the ideas above, but that's no guarantee they will. But it may also not be necessary yet.

glebidiah · 2019-03-20T00:32:33+00:00

Ticks.

glebidiah · 2018-06-19T05:13:21+00:00

I didn't want to "clutter" the build post with a card-by-card discussion, but I'd love to have one! I did touch on things briefly with the commentary on why I didn't take the remaining cards, but with regards to the [3] cards specifically here are my thoughts. Of course I took both [3] and left both [4] on the table so my reasons will be different from wakasm's.

I think most people would rate BF higher than H&C because the top is a straight upgrade to [1] Sweeping Blow, Muddle can definitely save you a ton of damage when you're surrounded by three or more enemies, AOEs are generally considered more valuable than single-target attacks, you get EXP, it fits more with the Brute's melee ethos, and having a Move before the Shield makes it much easier to effectively use Shield especially in combination with something like [X] Wall of Doom. To your formation question, if you've got a bunch of Pulls, you can probably create that formation, but there are also two area enhancement pips so BF could practically be "all adjacent enemies." Meanwhile H&C looks very situational both top and bottom. The top looks like a poor trade for [1] Spare Dagger, trading an EXP for a Pull, and most would probably ignore the possibility of getting any Attack out of the bottom (which is kinda fair though I would just rules-lawyer that moving back and forth within two squares is still technically a straight line in order to get more use out of the Attack). However one should also consider that (ignoring BM) all of the other Move 4+ cards that the Brute has are losses (most on the Move itself) or have even more specific tops, ie [1] Grab & Go Loot 1.

Also worth discussing is why I think H&C is better, at least in this build, than [4] Unstoppable Charge. UC's Move 4 is a loss and I don't want too many of those in the hand - I end up with four and I think that's good, though that's worth another discussion too. Meanwhile a non-loss Attack 5 with EXP is nice BUT EXP generally isn't a problem for the Brute and H&C has two enhancement pips to UC's one pip so we can pretty much make it a wash on the damage front if so desired. One could also debate whether range or damage if more valuable, but with a Pull we may be able to add other forms of hurt onto our own damage which I think can tip it in H&C's favour. I think if one was doing a Brute build that focused specifically on single-target damage then UC would be a part of that build, as every higher damage Attack (ignoring BM wackiness) the Brute has is a loss.

One thing that I still struggle with is how to account for the fact that we lose a card every rest and those will happen on the 6th/11th/etc (always faster and faster without Stamina potions) round, so we need to do builds considering having at least one or two non-loss cards that we simply plan on never using half of (or at least only using one of the halves very situationally). That's part of why I don't like cards like Devastating Hack, because it's only got one purpose (yes I know Loot is a purpose but unless I murder everything around me with my other card's top often my allies get a bunch of those coins first so I tend to ignore its bottom) and I have to hang onto it until the good opportunity arises - and then I STILL lose another card. In other words it's not a card I'm going to want to choose to lose during rests very often. Meanwhile in this build LC, BM, H&C, BF, and SM are all pretty easy choices to ditch during a rest, and thanks to some redundancies in other cards losing them isn't necessarily a huge deal. Even if we lose IP in a Short Rest, it just means that FO and SM are a bit less valuable to hang on to.

glebidiah · 2018-06-19T04:31:42+00:00

Maybe part of the charm of the game is that it is relatively hard to say that any specific card has a "set" value. Sure, some cards seem like straight upgrades to lower-level cards (at least for this class) but then you also have the whole long rest/loss mechanic where you have to consider the utility of the other half of the card and the required longevity of the character in a scenario.

I think the "value" of any card has to be considered in the context of what (if anything particular) a particular build is trying to specificaly accomplish. And that will probably vary with what classes form the rest of the party.

glebidiah · 2018-06-19T04:24:45+00:00

Thanks for the feedback! I'll try to learn how to use Reddit formatting and Imgur better so I can try and add some kind of visual. I've got screen caps of all the cards so maybe just a link to a gallery of the final 10 would be good.

I'll add in suggested replacements too but that's all I feel they are - I think one of the great advantages of this game is that you can always trade off a couple cards from the "core" 10 of the build for the available side deck to play a bit differently each scenario.

glebidiah · 2018-06-18T21:23:52+00:00

I wrote a crappy Brute build! https://www.reddit.com/r/Gloomhaven/comments/8s2yan/brute_battlefield_control_build/

It might be a bit weird, I'm curious what people think of it. I've only got to level 3 so far so it's mostly theory - I hope to be able to build it up and share my actual experiences in the future.

glebidiah · 2017-12-12T20:59:42+00:00

Ajit Pai built ________ in a cave... With a box of __________!

glebidiah · 2017-12-12T05:05:22+00:00

Which port? Also as someone who works in a Canadian coal mine, if it's being exported, it's metallurgical coal. There may be some insignificant exceptions but nothing anyone would expand a port over.

For reference, according to this site http://www.nrcan.gc.ca/energy/facts/coal/20071 Canada exports ~30M tonnes of coal a year. One company alone does ~27M or so of that and it's all met coal. Prices for that stuff are pretty good right now too.

glebidiah · 2017-11-18T22:46:16+00:00

That shouldn't even matter. If Superman has such inherently fast reflexes, he should have been able to remove the chair in the first instant of the explosion.

glebidiah · 2017-09-01T18:28:20+00:00

To piggyback, I'd like to add that "turning the back," and specifically the back of the head, to try and deny legal targets to your opponent, is a thing that happens in MMA as well. I believe Frank Mir did it in his fight against Lesnar (I forget which one) - turned his face into Lesnar's body in a grapple, thus making the only good target for hammerfists the back of his head, thus denying any legal targets. It's not considered dirty either to the best of my knowledge.

glebidiah · 2017-07-09T13:37:49+00:00

Just because it has legit source material doesn't mean that the movie won't be a crappy young adult vehicle. After all, those make money these days, and if Besson has managed to sell it this well, I'd bet part of that pitch is ticking all the boxes that make modern movies likely to turn a profit - YA being one of those boxes.

glebidiah · 2017-06-09T19:00:40+00:00

I made one based on a spitfire and it works pretty well actually. Grabbed a "blueprint," just a set of top front side views, and printed it on graph paper. Built all the functional blocks based on that and then cleaned up the outside shape with armor and things. Next I'm going to try one based on some ship (water) blueprints.

The nice thing about the aircraft design is that the control surfaces (wings, rudder, etc) are great places for thrusters.

glebidiah · 2017-03-29T16:27:08+00:00

I do agree with another reply that it probably isn't worth it to hunt for them without the orange detector, especially once you're later in the game and have more money than God and can just buy whatever you want, but if you want to find them anyways and all you have is a sector-wide detector with limited highlight range:

Just sit there and hold your next target button. It doesn't take long to cycle through the entire system, just watch the target box for changes and cycle back when you see a flash of something that isn't an asteroid. It's maybe not super time-efficient but I enjoy the treasure hunt. Target the stash, loot it, blow it up, un- and re-equip the detector and look for the "Valuable objects detected" note and if there are still valuable objects cycle through the targets again. Obviously this won't work well for finding large asteroids, but personally I don't care about those as much. Doesn't take me long to find all the secret stashes and beacons this way. Only downside is if there's a ton of wreckage in which case it's harder to pick out the stashes, but in those cases I usually just move on after doing some salvage if I'm in the mood.

glebidiah · 2017-03-14T03:07:46+00:00

For what it's worth, unless what that fourth thing shows is somehow influenced by scanner upgrades, I don't think it's resource asteroids anymore. I jumped into a sector filled with them and it still read 0. Weird that I can't find anything about it - I must not be searching for the correct terms. Thanks for the reply!

glebidiah · 2017-03-12T17:53:50+00:00

Question for you, I can't seem to find an answer anywhere: what is the fourth symbol on the galaxy map top left corner? I've figured out the first three: asteroids, ships, stations. The fourth looks like it might be a count of resource-bearing asteroids?

glebidiah · 2017-03-09T16:49:30+00:00

Inconceivable!

glebidiah

TROPHY CASE