10 Best Ways to Play Games For Real Money Free Online
10 Best Ways to Play Games For Real Money Free Online
60 PayPal Real Money Apps and Games to Try in 2021
Win Money Apps? Here are 15 Best Game Apps to Win Real Money
6 Best Game Apps That Pay Real Money Fast for 2021
Best MMORPG to Make Real Money 2016-2020 EnyGames
8 Best Online Games to earn money Online Earning Games 2020
Top 20+ Game Apps to Win Real Money & Prizes (2021)
21 Fun Ways You Can Get Paid to Play Video Games
18 of the Best Game Apps to Win Real Money ($$$)
9 Best Game Apps to Win Real Money During COVID-19
best games to earn real money
best games to earn real money - win
Torn City Online RPG
From Torn.com: Torn City is an exciting, gritty, real-life text based crime RPG. Online RPG games are addictive and great fun to play. Torn City is no exception!
Welcome to out community where we talk about obtaining a good Roblox Robux Hack and new Roblox cheats for players that still play this game in 2019! This is a fan base for those looking after a Roblox hack and also to discuss about other tricks and tips within this game.
I want you to understand this. Truly. I like GameStop. I like $GME. I believe in the long term plan (or what I/we think is the plan, anyway). I bought a Pro Membership and have put in orders through the app I downloaded. I think they'll kill 4Q earnings in March. I THINK GAMESTOP IS A GOOD COMPANY. I think Cohen and his team bring something to the table that will truly turn around the company. I think CNBC and particularly Melissa Lee can go suck an egg with their dismissiveness of the bull case, which they barely even pretend to have considered. I think the stock was and has been manipulated as fuck. My personal belief, which I require nobody else to share, is that Ryan Cohen and gang also still have more buying to do, and their buying alone will drive the price up. But my belief is that they have no interest in buying at this price, or they'd have done so. I believe they're waiting for the price to fall back toward the fair market value. And I believe they may force the issue by issuing more shares. That's what I believe, and why I'm not holding positions right now. I probably will in the future, but my personal opinion is the time is not right. I wrote these posts: https://www.reddit.com/wallstreetbets/comments/l6n4lj/on_leverage_supply_demand_how_we_got_here_gme/ https://www.reddit.com/wallstreetbets/comments/l6rsol/heres_the_letter_i_wrote_to_my_congressman/ (EDIT: lol I just realized both of those posts aren't visible since they were removed by the mods. They were pro-retail and pro-GME) I want to see people make money on this. Better yet, I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE MONEY ON THIS. Further, what Robinhood did, as well as Webull, Interactive Brokers, E*Trade, EToro, and tons of other brokerages did, was fucked up. Everybody here agrees. But you guys are actually fucking insane. We dont have a problem with the stock. We have a problem with YOU. Many of the people who have joined WSB in the past two weeks are brand new to investing. And that's okay! But the new people (7 million new versus 1.5 million old) have done the following:
Spent weeks downvoting every single ticker besides GME, AMC, BB, and NOK
Failed to realize there is no short squeeze on BB or NOK
Failed to realize the NOK spam was purely from bots
While you've realized there were bots that were bought, you missed (probably because you were spamming rocket emojis and gorillas) that the bots were spamming NOK.
Continually asked what stock WE are going to MANIPULATE next
Tried to educate the crowd on terminology you just googled ten minutes earlier.
I saw one person disagreeing with a long-time and well-respected poster here by telling other Apes to ignore that post, and to instead read a copied and pasted two paragraph blurb from investopedia that explained the effect of a stock split on a short position.
Made up securities laws and terminology that doesn't actually exist
Short ladders? Every time a price falls from a peak it's a short ladder? EVERY TIME?
You don't think that there's a natural reversion in the balance of supply & demand after a stock runs up thousands of percent in a matter of days?
With zero understanding of market mechanics, explaining to others why price action is fake
"Look how low volume is on this candle! It's not a real drop!"
Called people who have been involved in this play since Summer 2020 "paperhand pussies" for taking profits when the price of the stock went up 1,500%
Turned WallStreetBets into a political activism forum
Denying Reality
S3 partners is not lying to you. They and Ortex are consistently the best sources of difficult-to-obtain information on short interest. Just because they're reporting that short % of float is reduced FROM THE HIGHEST LEVEL THAT ANY STOCK HAS EVER HAD does not mean that they're lying to you.
Spammed low-effort memes and easily-Googleable questions on the new submissions
When your posts were taken down, you posted AGAIN
Accused anybody with an opposing opinion of being a hedge fund shill/bot
AGGRESSIVELY spamming to find buyers to help you get out of your huge negative position
I want to gag every time I see somebody write "I'm not a financial advisor" following a post that makes that very clear
Moving the goalposts
"YOU ARE HERE on the VW short squeeze graph!"
"We finished above $325! Gamma squeeze!" (Personal confession, I almost fell for this one and I'm glad I sold before the plummet).
"Ok so there was no gamma squeeze Monday but Tuesday is the day!"
"Ok we fell another 50% Tuesday but definitely Wednesday!"
"Fuck it let's just harrass investor relations to help us!"
Accused the mods of being paid off by hedge funds for doing what they've always done, which is remove shit-tier posts from the front page
which you then posted again
and again
Completely ignored the rules of our subreddit
Market Manipulation --
No Pump & Dumps -- pressuring other people to buy low float stocks (such as GME) so that you can drive up buying demand and sell when you've decreased your losses is a scam.
Political Bullshit -- If you think "it's not about the money" then get the fuck out because it is absolutely about the money.
No Bullshitting -- There are so many of you advising others on their trades (followed by "This is not financial advice, am ape") while you have no idea what the fuck you're talking about aside from something you just read on Reddit 5 minutes ago, which was posted by somebody else who had no idea what the fuck they were talking about, which was based on a tweet they read 10 minutes before that from someone who DID know what they were talking about, but OP misinterpreted the meaning.
Believe it or not, that's against the rules. Just say you dont know. Or say nothing. There's actually no need to spam.
Gain & Loss Posts - nobody wants to see your Loss on one-third of a share of AMC. Come on.
YOLO - Your investment in one-third of a share of AMC is not a YOLO. A YOLO is DFV leveraging up his entire $55,000 account with positions in a single ticker and letting it ride or die.
I can't even find the others that I had in mind using the search tool because the entire list of YOLO's and DD's is filled with GME and AMC karma farming.
You have formed a cult. You've now decided, amongst yourselves, that anybody who is not in on your play and wants to discuss other things is just a paid hedge fund shill. Do you think that's a healthy mindset? If this is the investment that you truly want to make, and you feel you have an understanding of the risks, then fucking let it rip. I hope it works out. Seriously, I want you to make money. I like Gain porn a lot more than Loss porn. But stop bullshitting. Stop brigading. Stop spamming. You're driving us nuts. https://preview.redd.it/h7xqt1iw97g61.jpg?width=466&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=bc87b50bb806d2bedbb5aa0c3fa1ff56d19660b2
To be clear, I'd still wholly recommend this version of 3D World even without Bowser's Fury. The tweaks are small overall, and Bowser's Fury isn't going to sate the most hardcore of Mario fans looking for a brand new game, but the package as a whole is magical. If you were one of the many who missed out on this Wii U classic, fix that.
You can play a lot of 3D Mario games on your Switch. Super Mario 3D World + Bowser’s Fury is just as good as any of them. It contains makes the Wii U game feel better than you remember, and the bonus campaign makes the package one of the best ports Nintendo has brought to the Switch.
Despite multiplayer now being online, it still feels superfluous, but otherwise Super Mario 3D World + Bowser's Fury might just be one of those fabled "perfect" games.
Super Mario 3D World remains one of the better linear Mario games, and anyone playing it for the first time is in for an absolute treat. Add to that the curious bonus adventure that is Bowser's Fury and you've got a package that provides great value for money. It isn't without its flaws, but most of these (online multiplayer, repetitive missions in Bowser's Fury) relate to the new additions; the main game itself remains as pure and perfect as it was seven years ago. Had it just been Super Mario 3D World on its own, we'd be thoroughly recommending it anyway; Bowser's Fury is just the cherry on top.
Bowser’s Fury is a short experience – it’ll take a competent player a couple of hours to see all it has to offer, and a few hours more to drive it all the way to 100% completion – but it’s completely worthwhile. It has some great surprises, which is why I talk about it in such generalized terms. Bowser’s Fury would’ve made a great download-only, budget-price stand-alone – so as a bonus included with an already excellent game, its value can’t really be overstated.
This is one of the best platforms in history, and its expansion is by no means a minor content, since at some times it shines with more personality than the original title. In short, an indispensable pack has played the video game on Wii U or not, and one of the most essential works of your Nintendo Switch.
Although Super Mario 3D World is only an implementation for Nintendo Switch, it has not lost any of its charm and ingenuity. The loving optimization for the benefit of the gaming experience, as well as the bonus adventure Bowser's Fury, are convincing across the board and promise fun for up to four players. Even some questionable level designs can hardly tarnish the overall picture.
Super Mario Mario 3D World + Bowser’s Fury is a package that offers two different ways to experience one of the best 3D Mario adventure, making it ideal for the franchise’s 35th anniversary celebration. There is no doubt that the game is a two-way diversion, able to preserve elements of the past and paint majestic novelties around it, as Bowser Jr. does with his paintbrush in the new and fascinating Bowser’s Fury.
Super Mario 3D World + Bowser's Fury is an explosive pack. 3D World returns with an improved pace, while retaining the stellar gameplay that characterized it when it first launched, and of course being still as hilarious as it was back then. Bowser's Fury takes the lesson a step further, creating a small and dense open world that will put you to the test with a sense of urgency unlike any other Super Mario game. The result, needless to say, is pure, unadulterated joy.
This package combines tried-and-true gameplay and level design with unique concepts (plus an all-new game) to earn its place among the elite games in the franchise
It´s not one, but two great platformers for Nintendo Switch. One of the greatest Wii U games (with improvement such as online multiplayer and photo mode) and a new Mario 3D game, not as big and ambitious as previous games, but equally fun and full of surprises.
Super Mario 3D World is an excellent game so if you still haven't played it or simply want it on Switch, this will make a wonderful addition to your gaming library. Oh, and you also get a fantastic bonus game with Bowser's Fury so how could you go wrong?
Super Mario 3D World shows why Mario is an ageless franchise, with the seven-year-old game providing fresh fun and a delightful experience. Bowser's Fury is the exact opposite, showing just how exciting and experimental the series can be.
Super Mario 3D is a great game to play solo or with friends and shows off some of Nintendo's best level design yet, while Bowser's Fury is an inventive take on the Mario formula that's more generous with its content than it ought to be. Both games make for a fantastic bundle and should be checked out by fans and non-fans alike.
Overall, this is a fantastic collection of Super Mario games. From the focused and demanding Super Mario 3D World to the more experimental, though still very well executed, open world take for Bowser’s Fury. Both games have a lot to offer and will keep you very busy unlocking their innermost secrets.
Bowser's Fury is much more than just a bonus . Despite it is relatively short, it still feels like a fully fleshed Mario jump and run. Packed with the great main game including the long missed online co-op mode Super Mario 3D World + Bowers's Fury is a must have for every Switch user.
Super Mario 3D World + Bowser's Fury for Nintendo Switch effectively handles two important tasks: introducing new players to the classic game that came from the Wii U, as well as pleasing hungry fans with new great content. Definitely a must-play for all Super Mario fans!
Thans to its many clever tweaks, Super Mario 3D World + Bowser's Fury give the player many reasons to enjoy a great 3D platformer, now a little bit faster, and with friends around the globe online. Let's not forget Bowser's Fury, a tiny open world adventure which rightfully mixes gameplays from the Wii U and Switch episodes, and delivers a strong experience with a twist.
Quirky, creative, and constant good fun, Super Mario 3D World + Bowser's Fury blends Mario gameplay old and new with great success, creating a title that feels worthy of his 35th birthday celebrations.
Super Mario 3D World + Bowser's Fury offers much more than your regular Switch port with a brand new adventure that packs between 5 and 8 hours of great new original content. I loved my time spent in this new open world of Bowser's Fury and going through 3D World a second time sure was a blast. Hopefully, this new package gives the game the second life that it truly deserves.
Simple and immediate, beautiful to see and fun even in multiplayer, Super Mario 3D World is the "what if" of the history of Super Mario. But with obvious limitations compared to Super Mario Odyssey and the other chapters in 3D. Bowser's Fury tries to beat new paths, without avoiding a few slips.
One of the best modern Super Mario titles is made that little bit better and accompanied by a brand-new game that bends the formula in new and exciting ways.
If you've never played 3D World before or haven't touched it since the Wii U days, this is well worth the price of admission. Prospects get a little tougher if you're not interested in going through 3D World, because while Bowser's Fury is amazing, it's still approximately less than 10 hours of gameplay even if you do everything. But no matter what: Super Mario 3D World + Bowser's Fury might be one of the strongest Mario games available on Switch. The base game is fun and varied, while Bowser's Fury offers a distinctive, inventive, and superb open-world 3D Mario experience.
Super Mario 3D World is an incredible and underplayed Wii U adventure that's now available on Switch. But Bowser’s Fury steals the show with its exciting and fresh take on a 3D Mario game.
Super Mario 3D World + Bowser's Fury is a fantastic package that showcases what makes Nintendo games so special. Super Mario 3D World is just as good as when it released, and Bower's Fury is a surprisingly good standalone adventure that paves the way for the future of Mario.
Super Mario 3D World + Bowser’s Fury is a delightful double act. Super Mario 3D World holds up well, and offers a unique multiplayer experience that works particularly well on Switch. Its opening worlds are designed to cater for that varied audience, while the second half injects some much needed difficulty and is best played solo. Bowser’s Fury is experimental in nature, and offers something completely different with a fully open world housing plenty of Shines to collect at a rapid pace. While neither quite reaches the dizzying heights of Super Mario Galaxy or Odyssey, it is a double dose of Mario doing things differently, and a fitting finale to Super Mario’s 35th anniversary.
Near-perfect platforming, gorgeous visuals and a joy-filled soundtrack make Super Mario 3D World + Bowser's Fury one of the best Mario titles of all time, and an essential purchase for all Switch owners.
Ultimately, Super Mario 3D World, in this package, is the best that game has ever been, with the increased speed and ease of multiplayer access making it far more enticing than ever before. Bowser’s Fury, meanwhile, is essentially the Super Mario Odyssey DLC that never was. It feels like Odyssey’s level and game design sensibilities, but placed in the Super Mario 3D World game engine, with all of the power-ups and quirks that game has to make something truly unique. Putting both of these games in one package is the best decision that Nintendo has made in a long while, as Super Mario 3D World + Bowser’s Fury is one of the best Mario offerings available on Nintendo Switch, which is lofty praise given the existence of Super Mario Maker 2. Now it just needs the option to play again, but as Luigi.
I can't really recommend Super Mario 3D World + Bowser's Fury enough. Whether you've played the original game before or not, the addition of online multiplayer is a big win, while Bowser's Fury is a testament to just how pure a Mario game can be while still feeling fresh and exciting. Put simply; this is an essential game for Mario fans.
Super Mario 3D World + Bowser's Fury is both a welcome return for a platforming classic and a novel expansion of what made the game so special back on the Wii U. There's a solid chance that millions of players missed out on its excellence back in 2013, so now is the perfect time to take it for a spin.
The real star of the show, however, was Bowser’s Fury, which innovates on the foundations laid by previous 3D titles, to provide some of the most enjoyable, open-world platforming I’ve had the pleasure of playing. This is a must-buy for Switch owners and Mario fans alike and is sure to tide you over the next couple of months.
As the title itself indicates, Super Mario 3D World + Bowser's Fury proves to be more than just the re-proposal in Nintendo Switch sauce of an exclusive Wii U not particularly lucky: the idea of inserting for once a completely new extra is very appreciable, and you find the ideas inside Bowser's Fury are not lacking at all. While the difference in tone and gameplay between the two games is quite right, the overall superiority of Super Mario 3D World over the new adventure is also evident, which ends up being an appendix or little more. The effect is that of a very solid pairing, which once again celebrates the undisputed supremacy of the Great N in the platforming field.
Super Mario 3D World has aged quite well. It is still a very enjoyable adventure, updated in its rhythm and different enough from Super Mario Odyssey for those who came to Switch without going through Wii U to discover it. The big surprise is Bowser's Fury, which transcends the concept of simple DLC and adds mechanics and novelties of epic dimensions.
Super Mario 3D World + Bowser’s Fury is an excellent case for why Nintendo should be porting more Wii U games to the Switch. With its improved presentation and the convenience of the Switch, this is definitely the optimal way to play Super Mario 3D World, even without much in the way of new features. Bowser’s Fury is also an excellent open-world Mario mini-adventure, which is probably worth the price of admission on its own. Admittedly, the multiplayer features some camera issues, particularly in Bowser’s Fury. However, that should not stop Mario fans of all ages from checking out Super Mario 3D World + Bowser’s Fury, especially if they missed out on this much loved platformer the first time around.
Super Mario 3D World may not have had much added to it aside from an online function that is limited to only saving progress for the host, but it didn't necessarily need much else. Nintendo successfully found a way to evolve the 2D classics without going open world, and the result is one of the most consistently fresh and enjoyable games around, which, despite lacking the challenge of the NES games, has something for just about everyone. The bonus Bowser's Fury solo adventure is an absolute delight with a brilliant core idea that adds a crazy tension to Mario platforming, but it is hard to present a case for purchasing this pack just to play it. Whilst full of great content, it is too short-lived to feel worth the asking price, and really needs a standalone purchase option. When taking both games into account for those that have not played the original Wii U title, though, this is a cracking bundle of Mario goodness that encapsulates what everyone knows and still loves about the moustachioed hero after an enduring thirty-five years.
Bowser's Fury offers some great new ideas and is much more than a simple DLC. It's a great Mario game in its own right, with enough to entice those who played 3D World before with a wholly new and compelling experience, as well as offering one of the most epic showdowns in Nintendo history. Bowser's Fury is a great take on 3D Mario and finally makes Bowser the menacing villain he deserves to be. The game's only flaw is that it left me wishing there was more of it.
Super Mario 3D World + Bowser's Fury is the Wii U port that Switch owners have been waiting for. Besides the inclusion of online multiplayer, 3D World is the same good game that players already experienced on the Wii U, and fans of the series who missed it the first time around will enjoy its hybridization of 2D and 3D Mario gameplay. But the highlight of the package is Bowser's Fury, a scaled-down but surprisingly robust mini 3D Mario game that actually takes some chances.
Glyph brings together the simplest form of platforms and puzzles in one package. It is an entertaining experience that shines for its simplicity. Although it falls short in scope, it fulfills the most important thing: is fun to play.
Even with the Bowser’s Fury miss, the content is worth it. If you want one of the best and most versatile multiplayer experiences to date for the Nintendo Switch, online or offline, go with Super Mario 3D World + Bowser’s Fury.
I don’t think Super Mario 3D World + Bowser’s Fury annoys me as much as it did on the Wii U, since the Switch already has the best Mario ever made on it; and I do think there is fun to be had with these games, even though I find them to be fairly frustrating. I would still recommend them if you enjoyed the originals, or maybe wanted to play them with younger gamers. Even though I might not go back to it very often, I don’t regret the time spent with it.
Bowser’s Fury works just fine as an added bonus packaged with an under-appreciated platforming gem from the Wii U era. If you’ve never played 3D World before, this is a great chance to catch up on a fresh take on 3D Mario design. If you’re mainly interested in Bowser’s Fury, though, maybe wait until the strong ideas get expanded into a full, standalone game.
Super Mario 3D World + Bowser's Fury might include the same game that was on the Wii U but it's also a title that needs to be experienced by everyone who owns a Nintendo Switch.
Super Mario 3D World + Bowser’s Fury is essentially the same game on Switch that some of you may have experienced on Wii U. While there’s no denying that the new hardware can’t keep up with the game’s ambitions at times, this bundle is at its core another fantastic Mario experience.
BB -- Blackberry AWS -- Amazon Web Services IVY -- Intelligent Vehicles Yo. I don't actually know if this stands for anything QNX -- Quick-Unix perhaps? It's a Unix-like embedded microkernel RTOS (real-time operating system) EOY -- end of year PT -- price target SP -- stock price EV -- electric vehicle SoC -- System on a Chip IoT -- Internet of Things TL;DR: Blackberry ($BB) is almost daily announcing new partnerships and new clients for their software, including new deals with companies that are just now or just this year launching autonomous vehicles that run on QNX software. The big kahuna of all these deals is BB's recent partnership with Amazon to go 50/50 into BB's software IVY, a scalable cloud-connected software platform designed for intelligent vehicle data gathering and data sharing. With Amazon's Jeff Bezos stepping down, and Andy Jassy filling his shoes, who was the CEO of AWS, BB will have some very firm support behind Amazon's new CEO. BB and Amazon are having a webinar Feb. 23rd about their partnership and IVY, which should be a strong catalyst moving forward. IVY beta earnings are projected to begin impacting BB's Q3 or Q4 earnings beginning in November this year, with IVY fully being integrated around the 2023 timeframe. Through a lot of reading and analysis, I believe BB has a four-tiered business model dating back as far as 2013 when BB's CEO John Chen was hired to begin the massive BB turnaround process. Tier 1 was development of QNX and IVY, lasting from 2013 to today and onward, however, Tier 2 overlaps Tier 1. Tier 2 was customer acquisition, primarily distributing their secure software in QNX, SecuSuite, Spark, and AtHoc. They secured 37 automakers during this time, including 9 of the top 10 automakers, over 106 governments from around the world, including all of G7 governments and 18 of G20 governments, as well as 77% of Fortune 100 companies, including partnerships with Amazon, Microsoft, Google, Sony, XPENG, XPEV, NVIDIA, Intel, Qualcomm, Baidu, IBM, LG, Samsung, and others. Well if they have such an incredible market share, why are they so undervalued? The answer is that QNX was not the end-all-be-all product. It was the base that the rest would be built on. Particularly IVY, which is the real money-maker. Tier 3 is IVY beta, and Tier 4 is IVY distribution and subscription revenue streams. So why is IVY the big deal and not QNX? They are both big deals, but QNX was never designed to be the money-maker. They are charging a one-time fee per vehicle use. There is a bigger goal here, to secure their clients as their customers for the bigger product in IVY. They also need QNX is to be a secure system in order for IVY to be trustworthy and reliable. And it certainly is secure. QNX has ISO26262 certification, as well as US government clearance, NSA clearance, and CIA clearance. The US government uses QNX and Blackberry products. Just let that sink in. That should tell you something about its security. Anyways, IVY will be used in autonomous vehicle level 4 and level 5 communication (note that QNX is level 5 certified... it has a business moat just in its security level and clearance), as well as EV and gas vehicle data collecting and AI-powered data synthesis. See below for more details on IVY. Wrapping up this TL;DR, BB is going to do well this year as IVY unfolds, but will do even better in the next 2-5 years. I have a PT of 25 by EOY and a PT of 80 by 2023 EOY, and a PT of 160+ by 2025 EOY TL;DR: TL;DR: BB go up, but go slow for now because IVY revenue not here yet, but big fast later. Make big monies, BB is the future tech that Amazon, Microsoft, Google, etc will be building upon in the EV and IoT market
FAQs:
1) Why is Blackberry stock price going down? A: A few possible reasons. One, as of today the whole market is down. BB is connected to overall market swings as most companies are. Two, there may be some market manipulation by bearish financial institutions as there are a lot of calls expiring on 2/19. I would expect that BB SP to be volatile between $11 and $14 between now and then, and to move upwards after 2/19 and especially after 2/23 (Amazon + BB webinar). Three, there are bearish investors who still think BB is a phone company and don't understand the underworkings of BB's business strategy, their software, their patents, or their partners. Their revenue has been affected by coronavirus and has not been particularly phenomenal so far this year. 2) Should I invest now or later? A: First off, I'm not a financial advisor, these are just my opinions. Invest at your own risk. In my opinion, BB will see a large SP growth by EOY, anywhere from 50% to 150% growth by EOY. While revenue will likely not increase much this year, the partnership with Amazon and news regarding IVY will likely create new floors for their SP much higher than the current SP right now, at around the $12 SP 3) What's stopping competitors from building a similar product and hurting BB's business? A: There's a lot of reasons why BB has a huge moat right now. One, notice the partners that BB has with QNX. They've got all the big boys working them, aside from Apple and Tesla. Seeing as SpaceX runs on QNX, and seeing that Apple was trying to make a deal with Hyundai that did not go through, I think it is still possible that either Tesla or Apple or both companies could also make a deal with BB to use QNX as their OS system. BB worked to develop their QNX embedded microkernel OS for the last eight years or so. Anyone trying to step into the game now is far too late. Apple has the best chance of all companies, as it has its own OS and Apple knows security very well, but this still requires an entirely new system in order to work in the EV sector. Also, Apple announced recently that they would be developing their own EV, although they did not give much details beyond that statement. The likelihood that they are both working on the hardware and software side of this thing is slim given the large number of difficulties that come with certification as it relates to the cybersecurity software space. Regardless, I would suspect that either Apple or Tesla is the most likely to be competitors in this space, but neither company has successfully completed a certified OS system, particularly for the emerging sector of autonomous EVs. Tesla is currently building a Linux-based system that is having a lot of difficulty in passing certifications such as ISO26262, a struggle that has been ongoing for years now. They may achieve a product that passes these safety regulations and certifications, but the question remains whether this will be in time as the EV and autonomous market picks up speed, and whether competing companies would even be interested in using their product. In fact, any car company is unlikely to develop their own OS software because none of their competitors would be likely to use it. BB is the perfect business to license since it is not competing in the hardware sector for the EV market. This argument can also be used for Apple if they are also building an EV. 4) Why is BB's revenue so low if they have so many customers and partners? A: QNX has been licensed so far as a one-time purchase, per vehicle or IoT using their software. IVY will be a subscription-based software that also includes a one-time purchase. Thus, BB's revenue streams are somewhat unimpressive currently, but they are playing the long game. If my hypothesis is correct, it is John Chen's goal to lay low as software is developed and customer relationships are built. It's the same with the book market. It's the sequel that makes all the money, not the first book. QNX is just the first book of a series looking to hook in its customers with low costs before hitting 'em with the strong follow up in IVY. Additionally, in order to build a competitive business moat, it was to their advantage to not forewarn any competitors of their involvement and plans. Consider John Chen's work as a CEO in his last business Sybase. Chen worked as the CEO of Sybase for 10 years. For the first 7 years, the SP remained at around $10 a share. Three years later, the SP was at $100 a share. I suspect he is implementing a similar model with Blackberry. Chen joined Blackberry in 2013. BB stock actually dropped for most of the last 7 years, resting at a stock price of around $5. Now BB is at $12 a share. I would not be surprised if BB reaches $50 two years from now.
Blackberry Clients and Partners Automakers: Honda, Audi, Jeep, Mitsubishi, Ford, Hyundai, Volkswagen, Bentley, Lamboghini, Byton, Mini (cooper), Toyota, Subaru, Fiat Chrysler, Mazda, Nio, BMW, Porsche, Lexus, Kia, Land-Rover, Mercedes-Benz, Buick, Jaguar, Visteon, Skoda, Chevrolet, Nissan, Acura, Continental, General Motors, Baidu, Motional Other: Denso, Aptiv, Bosch, Panasonic, Harman, Bugatti, LG, Vodafone, Bell, Carahsoft, CACI, Telus, iSec, KPMG, Tableau, Qlik Major: Amazon, Google, Sony, XPENG, XPEV, Li Auto, NVIDIA, Canoo, Microsoft, Intel, Verizon, Qualcomm, IBM, LG, Samsung Major Investors: PRIMECAP, Hamblin Watsa, Ontario Teachers’ Pension, Vanguard, Harris Associates, ETF Managers Group, Wells Capital, Arrowstreet Capital, Kahn Brothers Advisors, Norges Bank Investment Governments: Albania, Andorra, Angola, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Bahrain, Belarus, Belgium, Benin, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Botswana, Brazil, Brunei, Bulgaria, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Canada, Congo, Croatia, Czech Republic, DR Congo, Denmark, Egypt, Estonia, Finland, France, Gabon, Germany, Ghana, Gibraltar, Greece, Guadeloupe, Hong Kong, Hungary, Indonesia, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Kenya, Kuwait, Latvia, Lesotho, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Macau, Macedonia, Malawi, Malaysia, Mali, Malta, Marthinique, Mauritania, Mauritus, Mayotte, Mexico, Moldova, Monaco, Montenegro, Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Netherlands, Netherlands Antilles, New Zealand, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Qatar, Romania, Russia, Réunion, Saint Barthélemy, Saint Martin, San Marino, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Serbia, Singapore, Slovakia, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Swaziland, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, Tanzania, Thailand, Togo, Turkey, USA, Uganda, Ukraine, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, Uruguay, Vatican City, Western Sahara, Zambia, Zimbabwe
Blackberry Current Revenues:
BlackBerry Revenues: How Does BlackBerry Make Money? -- Trefis This display the biggest bearish argument to BB. Until IVY begins producing new revenue streams, BB is likely to not exponentially increase revenue streams, but only sustain moderate YoY growth
Blackberry Analysis Regarding Infotainment and Google and Ford Deal:
see "Blackberry (BB) Stock News Analysis | What I need to say..." by Financial Live by LEYA on the forbidden video website The media recently picked out a story that left out a lot of pertinent information, making it seems that BB lost Ford as a client. This is not true. QNX is designed to be a SoC. This means that other operating systems, such as Linux or Android, can be easily added to QNX. It is in fact encouraged. The Ford and Google deal was simply announcing the Ford would be using Android as their infotainment system. I believe that BB was never intended to try and be the predominant entity for all software systems in EVs or IoTs, but the backbone that connects all together, and to protect all components in a secure system. Autonomous EVs and even regular EVs in general would not be possible without a secure system protecting the product, as is true with IoTs. This is also why things like US Fighter Jets run on... you guess it, QNX. Ford is still using QNX. It is simply also now using Android that is running on top of QNX more commentary on this: Analyzing Blackberry Bear Argument - Case No. 1: Ford Deal
Image This is an interesting one to be sure. Facebook was being evil, like the do, and were caught using a number of BB patents. They settled in February, and the day that the settlement was finalized, John Chen (BB CEO) tweeted reminding everyone that BB is used on the ISS https://twitter.com/JohnChen/status/1358853064153784321?s=20 Well, the connection and speculation here is that Blackberry is going to the moon, and that the settlement is rather significant. Someone else also dug out some information in Facebook's most recent 10-K, specifically a portion for a 'non-cancelable contractual commitment' of an amount of $7500 million dollars. That's 7.5 billion btw. We don't know how big the settlement is, but it is worth noting that BB's entire market cap is 7.5B. I highly doubt that a settlement would reach such lofty numbers, but it could be possible that FB settled for some initial amount of $1B or so, as well as $1B in reoccurring payments over several years. We won't know until March 15th actually, so stay tuned.
Blackberry New Partnerships
Within the last few weeks, Blackberry has announced a stronger partnership with Baidu (China's Google), as well as their involvement with Baidu choosing to use QNX for their autonomous vehicles that will be hitting the road, as early as this year and next. BB has also announced their involvement with Motional, a joint venture between Hyundai and Aptiv, which will use QNX for their autonomous vehicles. Motional will be partnering with Lyft to use autonomous vehicles to begin serving customers and will be deploying their vehicles in 2023. It was also announced that QNX will be working with AOSP (Android Open Source Project), as well as announcing yesterday that QNX Hypervisor 2.2 is now released, which is what allows Android and Linux to run on top of QNX. A sum-up of all the recent news on $BB
Rumor: Blackberry Buyout? Here's why that's not happening:
Just read this post. It's quite revealing: Great Day for BB despite stick dipping. TL;DR: Amazon could have easily bought BB. Why didn't they? Well, all the big players are interested in this EV and IoT emerging sector. This is the new wave of technology that will dominate the market. First we had the dot.com boom, then the cell-phone and smart-phone market, and now we have the autonomous EV and IoT market. If Amazon were to buy BB, they would have to submit a tender offer. This would be a red flag to all the big players that Amazon were trying to buy up the best security out there. It would be a bidding war that could result in a double-digit multi-billion dollar buyout. It was much more to their advantage to create a secret alliance with BB and establish a 50/50 partnership, whose contract includes exclusivity for their use of IVY. Ouch! That's gotta hurt. This is where the importance of QNX lies. BB will be able to pull the rug out from any company that chooses to use something other than IVY. No IVY, no QNX, no EV. It will be a package deal where IVY is the big money maker. All other companies will have to build from the ground up or be forced to license QNX and make their money off of other sectors, such as the infotainment sector, as Google has already begun to do with the Ford deal. When this deal happened, the other big boys wet their pants realizing they needed to get into this space, and fast. Microsoft partnered with Cruise/GM. Apple tried to partner with Hyundai, who was so flattered, they may have initially said yes or indicated so, before realizing that they were already partnered with BB, so it was a no-go. Not sure if that is fact or fiction, but it is an interesting proposal.
Blackberry IVY + AWS Partnership:
Alright, so what's the deal with IVY? Why is it going to be so profitable? Why is IVY the real money-maker, while QNX has been used as the customer-acquisition software tool? Check out this picture: Image For one, IVY is designed for real-time communication between EVs or other IoTs. Autonomous driving level 5 requires vehicles to communicate with one another. This is where IVY comes in. IVY connects the different software components of an EV (which presumably are running on QNX), as well as harvesting data on those systems. The data used can be distributed for a wide-variety of uses, including, but not limited to, automakers and suppliers, app developers, consumer services, smart cities, EV charging providers, insurance companies, and vehicle maintenance providers. All of these different sectors will be willing to pay subscriptions for these data services, as well as the automakers and IoT makers who will also be willing to pay subscriptions for IVY. For instance, IVY can help share information between vehicles that will allow for a car detecting ice roads in one area so that other cars using IVY can take a different route. This results in less crashes, which helps the automakers. Insurance companies can use data from all these different data points as well, allowing them an inside-view of their clients. The list of what is possible here is inexhaustible. As for price points, the subscription models for multiple outside companies wanting to use the data will be create huge revenue streams for BB. With Amazon as a 50/50 partner, and with their resources and strategic management, BB will be poised to be the foundation in security and data sharing for the entire EV, and somewhat of the IoT market (the IoT market has more competitors for sure) see "Is BlackBerry Stock Undervalued?" by Wealthy Mindset on the forbidden video website see "Roadmap to $180 a share (BlackBerry Stock)" by Wealthy Mindset on the forbidden video website
Revenue, revenue, revenue...
Blackberry is poised to be an industry leader in EV, government, and IoT security and data sharing with products such as QNX, IVY, Spark, and their other software products. Stock price will likely stay somewhat stunted until IVY revenue begins picking up. It is possible that more announcements and marketing related to IVY will make this growth more rapid. In my opinion, either way BB over the next 5 years will 10x. The question is whether you want to get in now at $12 / share or two years from now at $40 a share or something similar, assuming that either way this stock is going to push for that 100B market cap (it's currently at 7B). There will be bearish analysts that will continue to say that Blackberry is a worthless company until those IVY revenue streams begin to come in. It is also possible that a realistic competitor may emerge within the next three years, such as Tesla or Apple. But if Apple is seeking to create its own EV product, then both companies will have a hard time finding any way to license their software to any other company. It remains possible that Apple and/or Tesla may strikes deals with BB as well in order to be able to produce autonomous vehicles and get a bite of that market share
Really, no competitors?
Well it's called a business moat for a reason. As we have recently seen, QNX is working with AOSP, and so clearly, they are not to be worried about. Tesla is not a true competitor as their OS product is not certified yet, and has demonstrated difficulty in doing so, and additionally, other automakers will not want to benefit their competitors by using their product. A third-party non-auto-maker will be much more desirable. Other companies such as VxWorks, have a lot of to prove both in security and certifications, as well as producing an OS product that is compatible with an emerging autonomous level 5 EV market. QNX's embedded microkernel RTOS is very much unique in this regard. This type of system allows for real-time processing and power distribution, while protecting the system from attacks. In an embedded microkernel system, if one part of the system is attacked, the whole system will not shut down, in layman's terms. This is essential for the security of any high-risk product that is built upon an underlying software that controls that different components of the system.
Conclusion:
All eyes are turned towards Blackberry right now. People want to know what this deal with Amazon will look like, how it will work, what they will focus on, (will Amazon also use this system for a fleet of delivery drones? hmmm), what the revenue streams will look like, what are their projections, what markets and sectors are they targeting, what are their future goals, what will Amazon be doing on their end, etc, etc. The Amazon + BB webinar may answer some of those questions, or maybe they won't. Time will tell (Feb. 23rd, specifically -- here's a link to sign up and watch: Next-Gen Vehicle Architectures Unlock Unprecedented Opportunities for Automakers). Also look out for that FB settlement numbers on March 15th, and Q4 earnings March 31st. I don't expect Q4 earnings to be particularly interesting unless they include the FB settlement numbers. Could those numbers instead be put into Q1 earnings for 2021? Possibly. Initially IVY beta is expected to begin being released late this year. I will also be looking forward to see how Apple and Tesla respond in the coming months. Ultimately, BB is a long-term play, but is poised to dominate this emerging industry with the partnerships and security focused software they have secretly been building. Now if only the could do something about their logo, some rebranding would be nice... This is not financial advice, just my own opinions. I am not a financial advisor nor a professional. I own 14k shares in Blackberry, as well as options (10x 8/17/21 20c BB). Do your own DD and fact check me as well
Hello fellow retards I know these are difficult times for this sub and it’s almost impossible to post something solid which is not about the current meme stocks. Instead of jerking to some porn i did some research on PLTR and want to share my DD with you. This might be a longer text for your love dopamine level so maybe you should grab some your Adderall before. The following text might you give your eyes aids since English isn’t my native language. I will try my best. Palantir as a Company – the beginnings PLTR was founded by some people and one of them is Peter Thiel who worked alongside with our holy papa Elon at PayPal. As a payment-service they had concerns about money laundering and founded PLTR to tackle this issue early. The CIA also funded PLTR (they are always funding stuff like this – Siri as example). This actually might be the reason why people think that PLTR is a company which aggregates data and do data analysis for the government….but this is not accurate and not correct at all if you see the big picture. I will explain this point later. You retard still reading? Nice here some rocket emoji’s to pump your dopamine and keep you happy. 🚀🚀🚀 Let’s start with the DD First of all my POV is looking for a midterm to long term investment in PLTR. My valuation considers PLTRs current state and predicting from now on for the next few years.
1. The Management
Before I start with the product I rather start with the management. You can sell the nicest thing in the world. I can guarantee you that the product definitely won’t be considered as the nicest thing after a while if you have a shitty management (Intel). With Peter Thiel on the leaderboard we got a competent asshole and CEO is Alex carp (co-founder) Peter Thiel is well known and Alex Karp is one of us. He yolod his heritage into some business and become a chad. Seriously tho, I trust Peter and if Peter holds on Alex since Decades so do I. Peter proved so many times how cunning he is and showed how to pick adapt problems early and create solutions.
2. PLTR Business model/ products
Before we understand how important PLTRs products are we have to understand that we are simpeltons who don’t have any business with PLTRs. We create data. We don’t fuck with it. We creating with using our phones or working in the office. Only a few of us may working with accumulated big data. PLTRs customers’ base isn’t neighbor Joe or Aunt Nancy. The products they offer are not even for midcap companies they are more designed for whole industries and governments. That’s the reason why their products aren’t so tangible for many people. PLTR basically offers systems to big companies/governments which import their data into these systems. PLTR doesn’t sends workers to the client to collect data and analyse it. They sell platforms. They got 2 Products called “Gotham” and “Foundry” You may think wtf is this guy talking about? Let me explain it in 2 examples: First example is Syria with Gotham. It was impossible in the country to know who the good guys are and who the bad ones are. I know u muricans only know yourself and the rest of the world is the “rest of the world” for you. But this wasn’t so simple in Syria you had many factions with different intentions and some of them were allies and some of them were enemies. The lack of information or the ability of recognizing and sorting these information’s are crucial in a war. PLTR solved the struggle with creating a map which provided resilient information for the marines so they can operate safely. Civil problems over there could also be fixed. https://www.mercurynews.com/2016/10/04/palantir-using-big-data-to-solve-big-humanitarian-crises/ Actually what the John Hopkins University does with the covid numbers and the map, is some sort of what PLTR offering with their solutions. There are rumors that the tracking of Covid and the vaccination will be done by PLTR. In their S1 Form PLTR describes it this way “Gotham, our first software platform, was constructed for analysts at defense and intelligence agencies. They were hunting for needles not in one, but in thousands of haystacks. And they did not have the software they needed to do their jobs. In Afghanistan and Iraq, soldiers were mapping networks of insurgents and makers of roadside bombs by hand. Gotham enables users to identify patterns hidden deep within datasets, ranging from signals intelligence sources to reports from confidential informants, and helps U.S. and allied military personnel find what they are looking for.” https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgadata/1321655/000119312520230013/d904406ds1.htm#rom904406_11 The second example is about “Foundry” and it’s directly from the S1 File of PLTR (page 121) “An Airbus A350, for example, has five million parts and is built by hundreds of teams that are spread across four countries and more than eight factories. Companies routinely struggle to manage let alone make sense of the data involved in large projects. Foundry was built for them. The platform transforms the ways in which organizations interact with information by creating a central operating system for their data.” Both of these systems solving big issues with less effort. The arms industry as example would took billions for drones and stuff in Syria for the same job. The important fact is that PLTR does not spend so much resources for new clients they only have to provide access and support for their services and the client feeding the “machine” with data. The key point is to understand that PLTR benefits very huge from economy of scales. This is very important since their costs for additional revenue is basically flat while the profits growing exorbitant with new customers. They offer a software and platforms and not kind of services where they need man power. All they do is working on their platforms and improving it. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-palantir-ipo-breakingviews-idUSKCN26E3I2
I could spam some multiplication on revenue or even a DCF but I think it’s not necessary. Expect the costs of research and development (maybe marketing) the costs of PLTR stood mostly flat in the last quarters. It’s a growth stock and the pricing is mostly in the perspective of PLTR. This is actually all we need to know that the revenue increases while the costs staying mostly flat. Check out the balance sheets at page 12 on the S Form 1. Let’s talk about the market. The whole market seems overpriced but it isn’t tbh. Due to the low cost of capital there is no alternative than to throwing your money on stocks or on real estate. There is nothing with a solid interest rate around (not even in emerging markets). At the stock exchange like in 70s, the companies had to offer a return, a perspective which should be more attractive as putting your money on a saving account with 8% interests without risks. These times are gone since the 2000s. So before people discuss insane valuation they should check out the fiscal and economical policies. Now back to PLTR and why the price is difficult to set (cheap imo). First of all PLTR did a direct listing without an investment bank for their share offerings. Its lacking of the valuation which they usually would get through such a process. PLTR wanted to do IPO with Morgan Stanley but it was mess. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-09-04/morgan-stanley-s-long-romance-of-palantir-pays-off-as-ipo-nears Morgan Stanley proved themselves many times as stubborn communists when it comes to valuations. I mean you guys remember their disgusting price targets for tesla like 100$ post split or stuff like that. These guys are very focused on numbers and I know it’s difficult to price in the potential and perspectives. But you can’t ignore these things for a fundamental valuation. If you want to consider these things in the price you have to understand the business of the company. This ended that one team at Morgan Stanley valuated PLTR with 5 billion while another team thought they worth 40 billion. https://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/news/2018/11/14/palantir-ipo-valuation-morgan-stanley.html How is this difference possible and why is this happening? Because people don’t understand what they are valuating. This happened a lot in the last decade because the decision makers in these banks and many analyst don’t have any idea which metrics they should use on companies like that. They are using the metrics from classical industries on new business. They freaked out when Facebook was valued with 100 billion as IPO. Same with Twitter and in the last years it was Tesla. They said apple going to tank every damn year in the last decade. I honor Warren Buffet so much since he has the dignity to realize that he don’t understands something but at the same time he sees the potential and the trend. That’s why he hired 2 Chads who bought Snowflake for him. The transformation and the generation change didn’t happened yet. That’s why they try to use the metrics from Caterpillar on Tesla. Guys the whole market is mooning with the cheap liquidity. Pennystocks and zombie companies transforming into billion dollar market cap companies. Facebook as IPO had a market cap of 104 billion back in 2012. At that time it wasn’t possible for Facebook to monetize their users with selling ads. They just paid 100 billion for the potential in more difficult market conditions. Look at the IPOs like doordash, Bumble. I’m not going to call this a bubble. Just check out their business cases and use the metrics. Maybe its easier for people to understand Bumble and Doordash… On page 12 of the S1 (balance sheet) Form you can already see the huge positive trends in PLTRs revenue and their costs. All this without all the positive events and contracts PLTR recently got. PLTRs valuation is difficult and I think it’s miscalculated by pessimistic communist who don’t understand that their products are game changers for industries, governments and defense forces. Because of these points I think there is huge price potential for PLTR
5. Risks for PLTR
Despite the general market risks PLTR mentions at page 29 of the S1 Form the competitors as the main risk: “We face intense competition in our markets, and we may lack sufficient financial or other resources to maintain or improve our competitive position.” The S1 Form didn’t aged well. Actually I don’t think that PLTR would have any trouble with offering new shares. Also with Peter Thiel as one of the founders the financial side should be stable. As PLTR competitor people use to mention IBM. The boomers from IBM already surrendered with their Windows95 computers and decided to cooperate. The biggest threat would be big tech with big money like AMZN or APPL. You all now the stories about APPL and Spotify or AMZN and all the merchants. Even if the big players would step into PLTR markets it would be difficult for them since PLTRs products doesn’t rely on an Amazon store or on apple devices. PLTR is years ahead with their products. I think the greatest risk (still) are the boomerish arms industry and all the boomers in pentagon and other authorities. There are very corrupt infrastructures when it comes to decision making and assigning contracts. People fear changes but they can’t avoid the changes. With the recent judgements we can see a turn on the tables but the transformation will still take time. It’s a circuit breaker with an avalanche effect. The risk factors on page 16 on the S1 form mostly aren’t relevant anymore. People complained that PLTR wasn’t profitable for 18 years. Well PLTR was never designed to be profitable and Alex Karp once said “love us or leave us alone”. https://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/news/2020/09/09/palantir-ceo-makes-livestreamed-pitch-to-investors.html But even this changed recently. PLTR became profitable in 2020 with 130,000,000§. Now the same people complaining about how high the stock price compared to the profits. Well just you wait.
6. Conclusion and Outlook
If you still reading I have to admit that this was a lot text and i am sorry again about the lingo. Let’s connect the dots and bring this information to a point
The boomer coalition in the pentagon and in the arms industry is taken down by PLTR. They will able to get the governments contracts and the classic arms/defense industry is no match for PLTR products. The judgements of lawsuits were catalyst and the effects should be already shown in the next earnings. These were such underrated events but I think there still will be some odds but PLTRs situation is much better as it was a time ago. The chains are off!
PLTR superior products profits hugely from economy of scales. They don’t have any significant costs when they acquire new customers. Making the big data usable for decisions making is already very important and step by step people realize that this issue growing fast. We creating everyday more data than we did yesterday and leaving the majority of it as trace and unstructured data. We don’t work with it but big Institutions does.
Here is the passage from the S1 and I fully agree with it: “The systemic failures of government institutions to provide for the public — fractured healthcare systems, erosions of data privacy, strained criminal justice systems, and outmoded ways of fighting wars — will continue to require both the public and private sectors to transform themselves. We believe that the underperformance and loss of legitimacy of many of these institutions will only increase the speed with which they are required to change.”
PLTRs value. The current situation of the market with tons of liquidity seems like a bubble. People don’t know what to do with the cheap capital and people throwing it even on meme pennystocks.
Facebook had his ipo back in 2012 during much harder market conditions as now. The valuation of Facebook was over 100 billion and people called it insanely overvalued. They did it because Facebook didn’t had a way to monetize their users (especially on mobile platforms). Facebook has a market cap of over 750 billion now and nobody calling it over valued. A remember the recent examples? Bumble?! Bruuuh. Don’t get me wrong if you invested in Bumble but they have nothing special to offer and their business case can easily copied or improved by others. Its shows the current state of our market with the crazy liquidity that even zombie companies got astronomic valuations. Use these metrics on PLTR with great products, great management, low cost base and less odds as ever before…. PLTR price is wrong imo especially in this market and with PLTRs current state and perspective.
Do you use PLTR? Me Neither! It’s not designed for us and we have to inform us about the success. PLTRs new contracts and their future are shining bright. With the settled lawsuits the sky is clear for PLTR. But their customer base is not only America. I’m not a murican and 3 weeks before I just find out that the police departments in our state using PLTR products. I don’t need to link endless evidences here since you can google it by yourself and see how many contracts PLTR recently got. Especially after the circuit breakers we talked about.
I have genuinely trust into Peter Thiel and Alex Karp that their will make the best of PLTRs potential. The odds getting removed and the demand for PLTR is increasing. If all these information would priced in correctly we would have a share price of at least 60-70$. With upcoming and ongoing positive events PLTR share price should soar more.. What’s next? Now we have earnings ahead and the lock up period ending. For the earnings I think the number will be fine and keep up the positive trend on revenue with a disproportionately trend of the costs. The most important part will be guidance for 2021. We should listen closely and see if the magic is already happening. The second event is the ending of the lock up period. You all remember the end of the lock up period of Nikola? Just 1-2 days after they announced they don’t got the GM deal? The stock tanked – for a good reason. You know the guy Trevor Milton. But in PLTRs case everything is different. Despite the successful deals they got, does a guy who says “love us or leave us alone” sounds like someone who going to drop his shares at the first possibility? I don’t expect such a behavior from Alex Karp and neither from Peter Thiel. If some employees drop their shares it should be fine. I would appreciate if the stock prices would go below 3ß. It would create a healthy bullish chart pattern and would be actually a nice discount to get in or stock up. I don’t think that the shares going to dump a lot because of this event. The earnings and the guidance are more important and the key events if you want to invest mid – long term. What does all this means for you? Nothing! Please don’t do any market activity based on my DD. I’m just sharing my knowledge and looking for critics so I can reevaluate my theses. This is not a financial advice. My hearts bleeding for all the GME holders. My last Reddit account got banned because I criticized “the pumpers”. In one of the comments I called the mods gay and got banned permanently (bye bye 20 k karma). If you are new to this please don’t do any decision based on this so I can sleep gladly. I’m not well positioned and not trying to pump this stock. I have 70 shares and a CSP. Fair play and fuck all the bots and pump and dumper we recently got in the sub! Leave an upvote if this post helped you. I need some more karma to be able to shitpost everywhere again!
[Video Games/Rollercoaster Tycoon] Theme Park Studio: How a developer set exceedingly high expectations and failed to meet them
Tl;dr: fans of a video game are excited about the release of what could be the spiritual successor of their video game. Said developer makes very bold promises and obviously fails to deliver, finally releasing a very disappointing game and alienating most of the community. I recently stumbled upon this subreddit; I've enjoyed reading most of the posts here and figured I had a few stories to share as well. From 2012 to about 2018, I was active (though with intermittent breaks) in a community of Rollercoaster Tycoon 3 players. This was a small community, with no more than a few hundred active members at its heyday and only a few people active now. Despite its small size, there were definitely a few memorable instances of drama. This is one of those stories; it actually involved another game called Theme Park Studio, which – as you may expect from the title – was not what it promised to be. Background Rollercoaster Tycoon 3 was released in October 2004, developed by Frontier and published by Atari. It was primarily a theme park management game, where players have to earn money and keep guests happy in a theme park by constructing and maintaining rides, shops, paths, scenery and more. There was also a sandbox mode that allowed players to build without any monetary restrictions. A small but active community set out to build roller coasters and theme parks (and occasionally completely different projects) in this sandbox mode and share their results online. While the game was good for its time and viewed positively by many, it did have some downsides. Firstly, the game used a grid: when placing rides and scenery, you were confined to this grid and had little freedom to place things where you want. Secondly, the roller coaster construction system was limited compared to similar games, and as a result most roller coasters were hardly very smooth. Thirdly, the game was poorly optimized. As an example: the game had a day-night cycle, but the game was basically unplayable at night, so people set the game to only daytime. Over time, people became more and more ambitious in their projects, and these problems became more apparent. As a solution, lots of custom content (akin to mods in other games) was made by members of the community: custom scenery objects, custom rides and even custom roller coaster tracks. These objects were much more versatile and looked much better than most in-game content. As a result, people almost exclusively used custom content to build their projects. Combined with some smart picture and video editing, almost nothing was still recognizable from the original game. While custom content brought a whole new level of versatility and arguably kept the community running for a long time, the aforementioned problems still persisted. Because the game was being pushed to its limits, people were wondering when a sequel was coming. By 2012, there was no word yet by Atari on a potential sequel, and many similar games from other video game publishers had failed to offer any meaningful improvement to Rollercoaster Tycoon 3. However, this was soon to change. The spiritual successor Enter Pantera Entertainment, a small, unknown video game publisher and developer. In November 2012, they posted a trailer to Theme Park Studio, which presented itself as a theme park building tool. Unlike Rollercoaster Tycoon 3, which had a focus on park management, the focus was on building attractive theme parks and rides. Many of the aforementioned issues were solved in this game: there was no grid-based system that dictated where you had to build, roller coasters could be constructed with much more freedom, and the graphics looked more modern. One major feature was the ability to import custom content. Obviously this was also possible in Rollercoaster Tycoon 3, but only using third-party software. That the developers were now anticipating for this was a good sign. The community was generally excited about Theme Park Studio: it looked to be the spiritual successor to Rollercoaster Tycoon 3. The staff from Pantera would even visit the forums (at the time, most of the community was active through online messaging boards) and would happily provide updates, answer questions and take suggestions. This left a good impression with most of the community. Over the coming months, more and more promises were being made on new features and huge amounts of content. The game was looking to become a very ambitious project. Now, it would later be discovered that little development had actually been done on the game: the trailer had really only showed footage from Pantera’s earlier title, Hyper Rails. Nevertheless, the release date was set for summer 2013, and the community was still optimistic for a long time. In April 2013, a Kickstarter campaign was set up. For the uninitiated, Kickstarter allows for developers to source crowdfunding for a project. Developers set a goal and have a set time to achieve that goal. People can ‘back’ a project by donate towards that goal, and in return receive rewards based on the amount they donated. Money only goes towards the project if that goal is actually reached; otherwise the ‘backers’ receive their money back. Well, Pantera set a goal of $80.000 for Theme Park Studio, to be fulfilled within a month. Backer rewards were ambitious: lower amounts would get you the game for free, both a physical and digital copy, and perhaps some merchandise, while those who backed larger amounts were allowed to suggest or design certain rides for the game, and the highest-tier backers (think $500 or more, which only a few people donated) would get you an invitation to a big release party. Now, keep these rewards in mind, as they’ll become important later on. It took a while and people feared the goal wouldn’t be met, but thanks to enough promotion and a few generous donations, about $100.000 was raised, and the goal was met. Despite Pantera’s ambitious promises, the community was optimistic. Some high-standing members of the community were even assisting in the development of the game and were offering their custom content – made for Rollercoaster Tycoon 3 – to be used in Theme Park Studio. Unfortunately, as we would later discover, this hard work would never really pay off. Early access The Kickstarter campaign offered a release date of September 2013. As time went on, it became very apparent that this was unachievable. The game was delayed several times; first to later in 2013, then to April 2014. Finally, they announced that instead of waiting for the complete game, Theme Park Studio would enter Early Access on Steam in February 2014. Early Access allows people to play a game before its full release. People can play the game and offer feedback to the developers, who can use this feedback to improve the game and add new content in free updates to the players. In this case, that would mean that Theme Park Studio would first release as a basic theme park builder, and that other features, such as new rides and the custom content importer would be added later. Early Access is an example of something that works well on paper, but is often butchered in practice. When done well, Early Access is a win-win situation: players don’t have to wait to play the game but can get involved in its development, and developers will receive money which they can use to fund the rest of the development. Unfortunately, it is rarely done well, and there are many games released through Early Access that are flat-out unplayable or clearly unfinished. Similarly, many games never leave Early Access or only leave many years later, because developers have little incentive to improve and complete a game they’ve already received money for. Well, Theme Park Studio would turn out to fit the latter category. Upon release, the game was... disappointing. Most notable was the lack of ability to build roller coasters: players could only build flat rides (simple rides such as a merry-go-round or a Ferris wheel). The game was also poorly optimized and didn’t look particularly great. Still, many people called for the community to be patient and wait for new updates to come: Pantera had provided a route map for the implementation of further updates to provide some perspective. This implementation was generally very slow. For example, the ability to build roller coasters – a rather essential part of a theme park construction tool - didn’t come until August that year; even then, people weren’t happy about it, as it was unintuitive and difficult to use, and many considered it hardly an improvement from Rollercoaster Tycoon 3. The community slowly grew divided. A sizeable group defended Theme Park Studio and called for people to be patient, but a growing group had become very critical of the game and its developers. However, besides lacking updates and producing a game of low quality, there were other glaring issues as well. Pantera loses approval Now, remember the aforementioned Kickstarter rewards? As time went on, it became increasingly clear that many of these rewards would never be released. Many people complained about not receiving digital access to the game once it was released through Early Access, despite promises from Pantera – and that was the easiest reward for them to fulfil. Even to this day, some people are yet to receive digital access. People were also losing hope about higher-tier rewards, such as physical copies of the game, merchandise and the release party. Probably the most controversial reward tiers were those that allowed backers to design rides, however. More than 100 people had pledged enough money to have a ride suggestion implemented into the game. It turned out, however, that many of these suggestions would never see the light of day. On the forums, people complained about their suggestions being rejected, while some received no response from Pantera. When eventually an update was released that was supposed to contain rides suggested by backers, people noted that way fewer rides were added than that there were backers. I don’t remember the exact numbers, but I think no more than 10% saw their rides actually published in-game. Now, resentment grew towards Pantera for failing to uphold their end of the bargain and releasing an unfinished, low-quality game. By this time, there was also not much left of the actively involved, feedback-taking staff that represented the game when it was first announced: the developer became notorious for failing to take and accept constructive criticism. Many people had their posts removed and accounts banned from the official Theme Park Studio forum for speaking out against the developer. Another absurd rule on their forums was their stance on ‘dark rides’, mainly indoor rides based around creating an atmosphere above being thrilling, such as a haunted house. As the name suggests, many dark rides are dark: the atmosphere is creepy or scary, and many horror themes are used. Well, the forum banned the posting of rides containing demonic themes or otherwise being ‘sacrilegious’, effectively meaning most dark rides. This pissed off the community, as quite a few people made dark rides and this was seen as infringement on their creativity. It also spawned a series of memes on rides that were “too dark and sinister for Theme Park Studio”. Another questionable decision by the development team was to add VR support; while becoming the only theme park building or management game to have it, it was generally criticised because it would add very little to the game and so many other aspects of the game needed much more working on. I’m sure there were other decisions made by Pantera that received significant backlash from the community, but these I remember best. The aftermath Over time, interest in Theme Park Studio faded away and people generally gave up hope that they would ever receive their Kickstarter rewards. There were still a few avid supporters of the game, but the broken promises, slow progress, disappointing results and bad PR meant most people in the community had changed their stance over the years. The game was forgotten and slowly faded into irrelevance. There was no real way for backers to get their money back or otherwise hold Pantera accountable for the unfulfilled promises, an issue that other failed Kickstarter campaigns unfortunately also have. Amazingly, some of the backers reported actually receiving a physical copy of the game, albeit five or six years after the initial Kickstarter campaign, but similarly there are still people waiting for their rewards to this date. Theme Park Studio was finally released in December 2016, after many years in development. It released without much fanfare and definitely without a release party that backers had paid hundreds, sometimes even thousands of dollars for; many people didn’t even notice it had left Early Access. The game never took off and its reviews on Steam are mostly negative. The entire fiasco made people much more sceptical of other new games: from 2014 onwards, many other theme park simulation games were announced and released, but people were much more cautiously optimistic about these games (and rightfully so; many of them failed, but those are stories for another time). Eventually, the true spiritual successor to Rollercoaster Tycoon 3 was released: Planet Coaster, developed by Frontier (the original developers of Rollercoaster Tycoon 3). It was released in November 2016, prompting some to think that the definitive release of Theme Park Studio only weeks later was a hasty attempt to piggyback off of that success. It did almost everything Theme Park Studio promised and offered the possibility to build much more detailed and complex rides. Over time, many people who played Rollercoaster Tycoon 3 switched over to Planet Coaster because of the vast improvements. People generally forgot about Theme Park Studio, and many people wanted to leave it in the past. It’s hard to find many of the original forum posts on the topic. RCTLounge, one of the major forums on the topic, was closed in 2016 due to inactivity. In 2018, Shyguy’s World, another forum on the topic, actually removed the Theme Park Studios board and deleted all posts to forget about the ‘dark and sinister’ affair. As the forum’s owner said: “The first rule of Theme Park Studio... you do not talk about Theme Park Studio”. The official Theme Park Studios forums are also down and the website is vastly outdated. Most of this post was sourced by memories, the Wayback machine and the few threads I could still find. Many people agreed that Pantera was probably a well-intentioned company that had simply bitten off more than they could chew. Clearly they had vastly underestimated the difficulty of this project and lost any drive to complete the project as it went on and support disappeared. Nevertheless, all the drama resulted in a bitter aftertaste for many people and changed people’s outlooks on the future releases of similar games.
Preface: Please believe me when I say I really wanted to take this month off and enjoy the snow in Tahoe. But as I was driving, something caught my eye... Make no mistake. This stock is not going to be nearly as volatile or profitable as GME. In fact, this might be so boring that most of you will ignore me yet again. And that’s exactly why I like it. I’ll do my best to make this engaging, but the fact is, this is going to be a slow grind. Both this DD and the stock. Also, as a bonus, Reddit is currently public enemy #1 in the eyes of the media. Why don’t we do a quick heel-turn and join their side? Are they gonna hate us for buying boring value stocks? They won’t know what hit them. That will be a fun show to watch. Anyway… let’s take a look under the hood. As always, not financial advice. Just education. NOTHING IS A RECOMMENDATION. We are just sharing knowledge here. Ok SEC? Intro: Ford (NYSE: $F -- NOT NASDAQ:$FORD), is another depressed deep value multiple expansion arbitrage play. No short squeeze this time. The GME asymmetry may not be seen again for 10 years. It might seem boring and unsexy on the surface, but Ford is a fantastic company in the midst of one of the best turnarounds in American history. And with a little help from our friend Mr. Options (or as Buffett called, Financial Weapons of Mass Destruction) we can turn a boring old Ford into a lightning fast Ferrari using the quadruple income option wheel strategy. Don’t try this at home. If you don’t know what CSPs, CCs, or vega are, stick to shares. Those should work just fine. Let’s break this down into 5 parts: electrification story and leadership, multiples expansion, technical analysis, options, and the trade. By the way, in 2019, the Ford F-Series was second only to the Apple iPhone, which raked in $55 billion, in terms of total revenue generated. The F-Series generated more revenue than the NFL, MLB, NBA, and the NHL combined, which added up to $40 billion. Just something to think about.
The wheels on the bus go round and round, round and round...
Electrification story and leadership: Let’s jump into history for a second. Ford had a meteoric rise from 1997 - 1999 from $15 to around $32 at the peak. This was due to $F reporting massive earnings increases each quarter:
They were just feasting and feasting. Jim Farley looks like the best person alive to revitalize Ford, capable of tripling the stock in 2-3 years. Look at the last two quarters:
Q3-2020 - Adjusted EPS: 65 cents vs 19 cents expected, Automotive revenue: $34.71 billion vs $33.51 billion expected (due to pent up demand)
Q2-2020 - Adjusted EPS: A loss of 35 cents per share versus a loss of $1.17 per share expected, Automotive revenue: $16.6 billion versus $15.95 billion expected.
Here are excerpts from the Q3 earnings and some other notable highlights:
Farley: Now that plan, which was introduced to the Ford team and many stakeholders on October 1, is very straightforward. Among other things, No. 1, we will compete like a challenger, earning each customer with great products but as well services with rewarding ownership experiences. Number two, we're moving with urgency to turn around our automotive operations, improve our quality, reduce our cost and accelerate the restructuring of underperforming businesses. And third, we're going to grow again but in the right areas, allocating more capital, more resources, more talent to our very strongest businesses and vehicle franchises; incubating, scaling and integrating new businesses, some of them enabled by new technology like Argo's world-class self-driving system; and expanding our leading commercial vehicle business with great margins but now with the suite of software services that drive loyalty and generate reoccurring annuity-like revenue streams; and being a leader in electric vehicle revolution around the world where we have strength and scale. So now speaking about EVs. To start with, we're developing all-new electric versions of the F-150 and the Transit, the two most important, highest-volume commercial vehicles in our industry. These leading vehicles really drive the commercial vehicle business at Ford, and we're electrifying them.
Quick sidebar here from my buddy M: "Whereas traditional manufact / consumer / industrials are valued on an EBITDA multiple, SAAS has historically been valued on a revenue multiple, which translates to flat out higher valuations. EVs themselves are not necessarily a higher margin product that justifies a higher multiple (at least not that I've seen), but tech services / subscriptions are the real money makers in this game. Hint Hint companies like Apple throwing everything they have at trying to integrate services and subscriptions over the last 5 years" This further justifies the expansion multiples we expect will catch up to leading EV automakers (see below).
We own work at Ford. And these electric vehicles will be true work vehicles, extremely capable and with unique digital services and over-the-air capabilities to improve the productivity and uptime of our important commercial customers. The electric Transit, by the way, will be revealed next month, and you heard about it here first, for all of our global markets. We believe the addressable market for a fully electric commercial van and pickup, the two largest addressable profit pools in commercial, are going to be massive. Now you're going to see our strategy of electrifying our leading commercial vehicles and our iconic high-volume products expand very quickly at Ford. When you look at our results, they reflect the benefit of our decision two years ago to allocate capital to our strongest franchise, namely: pickups, a whole range of utilities across the world, commercial vehicles and iconic passenger vehicles. Additionally, we saw higher-than-expected demand for our new vehicles in the quarter. Together, these factors, plus the strongest performance from Ford Credit in 15 years, led to a total company adjusted EBIT margin of 9.7%. That's 490 basis points higher than last year. As an outcome of all this, we generated $6.3 billion in adjusted free cash flow. The strong cash flow in the quarter gave us the confidence and the ability to make a second payment on our corporate revolver, which we did on September 24. So now we have fully repaid the entire $15 billion facility, and we ended the third quarter with a strong balance sheet, including nearly $30 billion in cash and more than $45 billion of liquidity, which provides us with the vital financial flexibility we need.
Check out this credit downgrade weeks before Ford paid off their revolving credit facility. Smells like GME? Alright. What about Q4-2020 and beyond? Ford is expected to post a loss. TA is signaling a beat (see the TA section). Ford is spending this money in order further restructure and deliver on the following items in their pipeline: Bronco:
Within the first month of open reservations, the Bronco had received an estimated 230,000 reservations. 230,000 reservations is an incredibly impressive figure, especially when put into the context of Ford’s total vehicle sales. 230,000 sales would represent 4% of Ford’s total sales.
Some other nice features: Fold down the shifter, lay seats down completely flat, speakers in headrest, tailgate worksurface (pen/pencil holders, rulers) C clamp, 120V outlet, bottle opener, light), sensing running board, tailgate step and railing, and more. Watch the video.
Ford Raptor launch (just happened today, customers are excited. Look at the comments on YouTube and IG) Further potential tailwinds:
The Postal Service told Trucks.com that it expects to reach a contract with one or more of the teams bidding for the business in the federal government’s second fiscal quarter of 2021. That works out to the first quarter of next year.
There is a historical inverse relationship between gas prices and car sizing. Tell me if I'm reaching here. But as America continues to head towards electrification and energy independence under Biden, larger gas cars will be more in demand. Furthermore, the aftershock of COVID will continue to propagate the dedensification of cities. Less commuter vehicles, and more travel vehicles. And look who is conveniently positioned to take advantage of all of this?
Dr. Anning Chen is also a killer CEO of Ford China. This is largely intangibles (which Wall Street cannot model), but watch his interviews here and here.
Dr. Chen used the COVID shutdown to improve the operational efficiency of the company. It has not shown on the bottom line thus far, but it will later.
Regarding the above leadership and BOD members, experienced executives are a better fit for running the day-to-day than any other. Add a sprinkle of savvy techfin folk and you have a recipe for a elite transition.
English please? Ford is a strong company. Farley is delivering on his promises and can lead the company towards an operationally efficient turnaround towards electrification. Combine this with a loyal customer base rivaled only by AAPL, and you get another special opportunity. This is the turning point. Multiples Expansion: Now here lies the crux of the thesis. Amidst all the EV hype, Ford is being unfairly ignored at an extremely depressed multiple compared to the other companies in the EV space. Here are some comparisons (numbers may be slightly outdated, pulled earlier this week, more relative comparison than absolute): $Ticker - Market Cap - TTM Revenue MM - TTM EBITDA MM - Revenue Multiple - Ebitda Multiple TSLA - $810B - $28B - $4B - 29X - 202X NIO - $92B - $12B - ($7B) - 7.6X - (NaN) GM - $78B - $116B - $18B - 0.7X - 4.3X F - $44B - $131B - $10B - 0.3X - 4.4X That’s an eyesore. Let’s focus on just TSLA and Ford, because why not. Assuming Ford can quickly turn towards electrification (from the evidence above), these two companies are fair comparisons. No Tesla is not a software/energy company, look at their automotive % of revenue. Stop it. It has only recently dropped to 80% due to the expansion of their leasing division. Energy is still a tiny part of TSLA. Revenue Multiple: TSLA = 29X F = 0.3X EBITDA Multiple: TSLA = 202X F = 4.4X Yes those numbers are correct. Look at them for 60 seconds and tell me what you see. Quick quote from my buddy M:
Just zoom out and think. TSLA is for sure ahead of the rest on their tech and charging infra right now. But in terms of just overall bottom line infrastructure and manufacturing capability; once the GMs, Fs, and VWs of the world can get the ball rolling, they are way ahead in that aspect. Much more experience in production and retail / distribution channels, as well as logistics sourcing. Plenty of battery makers, and self driving tech makers out there too right now. Small to mid scale M&A will probably be the name of the game if I had to guess.
This is why Burry is short $TSLA, but two scenarios can unfold: either the high-flying stocks drop, or Ford rises. I believe we will land somewhere in the middle, with Ford rising as we begin to enter the optimism phase in the final third of our bull market. Shorting is a dangerous game anyway... So I’ve been hearing on the news... TA, Options: Exhibit A from our resident chart whisperer J (who will remain unnamed because you monkeys keep bothering him). Larger view. As you can see, the trendline has broken out. Exhibit B from our resident quant T (also to rename unnamed):
Starting on 1/4 you'll find right tail distributions into any liquidation which represent large buying. Which has led up to a recent run-up and eventually left tail distributions which represent short coverings which lead into the gaps and thinner distributions where there aren't any major bids. Even with the pullback on 1/22 we see more right tail distribution after the profit taking from the recent run-up, which means someone is buying up the inventory. This is unusual for F, where F trades within tight ranges. On 2/1 you can see a bimodal distribution which means a new player has stepped in, which we assume has additional knowledge apart from the larger players that were already in the market. The recent range between 10.70 and 11.20 indicates that the market has accepted this price range as fair value. Without additional research at first glance we can see that a large player (or players) is buying up a significant amount of inventory. On 1/4 we find that the volume increased to 77,559,128 from the previous trading of 34,462,454 (125% increase) and 33,127,776 the day before that. Volume has been higher since. On our first major left tail distribution (which represents short covering) since the buying on 1/4 the volume was at 113,707,973.
Exhibit C 250k shares of F 10.92; 100k F 11.04; 3.53m F 9.78; 708k F 9.78; 500k F 9.64; 377k F 9.50; 338k F 9.50; 201k F 9.75; 192k F 9.80; 150k F 9.77 These are blocks of shares bought in the past 7 days Top OI changes: +19610 F 02/05/21 11 C 43821 38% 13% 48% +12904 F 02/05/21 12 C 31929 38% 11% 52% Top OI positions: 170902 F 02/19/21 10 C +807 26% 49% 25% 112480 F 02/19/21 12 C +3207 29% 29% 41% The percentages are bid mid ask. Someone is bullish on Ford. For an earnings play, daily RSI is oversold looking towards an uptick. Options gamma is interesting to note as well. Open interest on 2/5 $13 and $15Cs are also notable. Could be covered calls? Could be someone knows something? Could be Jeff reading too much into the tea leaves. Not financial advice. Just showing you what I see. The Trade: The simplest way is just to purchase shares and collect dividends as Ford may reinstate them sometime in 2021. Possibly leaps if you feel adventurous. For the option junkies like myself, and as a tribute to the greatest company in American history, I will use the wheel(s). The GME trade was a very special and momentous occasion. Now that we have a bankroll, we’ll just quietly play theta gang as we enjoy our lives and spend time with our families and loved ones. Here’s a good summary. This is not for amateurs. I mean, none of this is financial advice anyway, just educational. But in a nutshell, I will: 1) Buy shares, 2) Sell CSPs 30-45 days out with 0.3 delta, 3) sell CCs with 0.3 delta (will reconsider this if Ford goes vertical) 4) Collect dividends. The Wheel doesn’t work on everything. Here are the qualifications from the above post, let me know if this sounds familiar:
Profitable company that has solid cash flow
Bullish, or Very Bullish, analyst ratings
Priced around $10 to $50 so that I can afford to take the assignment if needed and I stay away from sub-$10 stocks as a rule
A stable chart without wild gyrations (especially those caused by CEO tweets!)
A nice dividend is always a good thing, both that you may collect it if assigned the stock but also that dividend stocks tend to more stable and predictable.
Hmm... Conclusion: Ford is a massive, complex, multinational corporation so I’ve likely missed very many things, but I wanted to get this out before ER so I can flex again. (No market manipulation here lol. My buddy's multi-million dollar block buys didn't move the needle one iota.) There are many things I haven’t covered, and simply don’t know yet. As more facts begin to unfold, and as I spend more time with the stock, I’ll share the information here. Also, every time I post about an equity, it seems to go down. Lol... (GME). With all this in mind, this is still a very risky bet. Nevertheless, I like what I’ve seen thus far. Ford looks like a fantastically healthy company in the midst of a turnaround towards electrification with a phenomenally depressed multiple according to the market’s appetite. It deserves a multiple trending towards TSLA’s, not a dying auto manufacturer. Jim Farley has shown early to be a great CEO and I think he can continue the transformation. We’ve begun to enter a phase of exuberance, so I’ll choose to long Ford instead of short TSLA. As a bonus, we have the opportunity to join forces with the boomers and talking heads and bet on one of their favorite companies. Time for America to be on the same side again. We’ve been divided for too long. I know my GME posts were lucky. I’ll stake my reputation on another bet. One call sure is lucky. What about two? In any case, investing is a marathon, not a sprint. Glad to be a part of this journey with you all. Note: I will not discuss GME in the comments, which all depends on Ryan Cohen. There is nothing further to add until Q4 earnings. And finally, we’ve officially entered the last phase of our very long bull market. This is not necessarily a sell signal yet, as some of the greatest returns can come in this period and can last for a long time. I will do my best to look for the signal and sound the alarm. The world will be celebrating, and I will be bearish. Burry’s passive indexing bubble call in combination with Thiel’s government debt bubble call will lead us into a dark time of unprecedented proportions. Tail risk hedging won’t work as the declines will be slow at first, and then fast and violent and unrecoverable. Be careful. Listen to Ken Fisher. Thank you very much for your time. Positions: Bullish shares, LEAPS, on-going quadruple income wheel strategy as Ford reinstates the dividend. Timeframe 12-18 months. Watch out VIGILANTLY for macro risks. Bear market is on the horizon. Drop some Fs in the chat to pay respects. PT: $32 with a chance of $98 if we start to see exuberance in the broader market. -JA
The original author's account was deleted, so unfortunately I can't credit them. Regardless, full credit to them. This post was included in the deletion, so it took a decent amount of digging to find and save. Shoutout to u/adamfixeseverything. Enjoy. -
Hey guys, I thought I’d post about my thoughts on MMED. First of all, please do your own due diligence and do not fall victim to the pump, hype and euphoria. These are highly speculative investments and have significant risk associated. All that said, there have been many requests for fundamental analysis and MMED projections so I wanted to provide my thoughts. *All figures in USD (market cap, sales) except for my investment holdings. I purchased MMED.NE shares. Source data available as well, but got messy with all the 10-k filings and links in the table. Entry Point First and foremost, I want to address the most commonly raised question on this thread: “Is it too late to buy MMED?” Any investment is subject to the risk / reward paradigm. Those that got in at $0.3 deserve every penny they earned as MMED was by definition a penny stock and one of the most risky investments you could own. Since then, it has grown tremendously due to scientific milestones which have pointed to significant progress in the industry. The milestones MMED has achieved have DERISKED MMED from a penny stock to a small cap biotech company with a very large drug portfolio and numerous future catalysts. I do not expect to make 10x my investment in a week, nor should you. Is there still tremendous upside even at the current valuation of ~$1.5bn? I strongly believe so and will let my position reinforce that. I entered this space with an average cost of ~$4.9 CAD, holding 311,206 shares, and a book value of ~1.5MM. Yes you read that correctly. Do I panic every day and check the ticker? No. Does my heart beat thinking of the time I evaporated ~$500,000 in unrealized loss when the stock was at $3.4? No. In fact, I continue to pick up shares at what I believe is a discounted valuation. There will be many that look at $4.9 entry point and think that even I got in at the bottom. It’s all relative. OP's Original Investment I only invested what I could afford to lose and although $1.5MM is a large sum of money, it is not my entire portfolio, nor would it impact my daily life. If I lost it all it would not impact my ability to service my mortgage, pay my bills, impact my other investments, nor prohibit me from doing the things I love. I continue to hold dry powder and monitor my investment on a monthly basis, while continuing to buy following successful milestones. This is a very long term play that could fundamentally change the way we treat the body’s most important organ. We are just getting started. I have a very strong conviction on the future outcome of this industry and that is the reason I couldn’t be bothered about short term fluctuations. An important question to ask yourself is whether you believe MMED can reach its next scientific milestone. Take things one step at a time and is there a probability the next scientific update will be positive? Emphasis on science, ignoring NASDAQ, candlesticks, and capital structure (for now). Institutional Capital I work in finance (albeit project finance / private equity, and don’t value stocks for a living, so don’t consider me an expert here) but already know of a few moderately capitalized asset managers that are now participating in MMED. The recent bought deals are evidence of sophisticated capital flowing into this industry. I personally qualify as an ‘accredited investor’ and am having conversations constantly with folks in my circles who are investing heavily into these stocks. As more institutional capital flows in, the more stable these stocks become. Of course, this is all relative. Access to liquidity As with all brand new industries, the capital requirement is immense in order to bring products to market. What drew me into the space was the fact that MMED did raise capital. Biotech stocks do not have cashflow, thus their only path to fund operations is through equity raises. The fact that MMED was able to raise over $237MM CAD since May 2019 is a positive for this company. Yes it is dilutive, and good job for paying attention in finance 101 class, but bootstrapping a biotech company is not possible, nor is servicing debt. The path to commercialization of will be full of obstacles, however a strong balance sheet with sufficient capital gives MMED the resources to get there. The current valuation has tremendous upside following scientific milestones and future equity raises and dilutions are a good thing, as it will be at an increased valuation. There are definitely smaller cap companies out there that may double overnight, however for the risk / reward, I do not feel comfortable owning companies that don’t have a large balance sheet, nor a diversified drug portfolio. Believe in the Science I do not feel I am in a position to write original content on the efficacy of these drugs. I have done my research and read a fair number of published studies but anything that I write would simply be regurgitating what others have said. The biggest investors in this space are those with personal experiences with psychedelics because you have first-hand experience of the profound meaning extracted from one treatment. The ability to dissolve your ego enables you to deal with the root cause of so many problems ranging from depression, PTSD and addition, without approaching the problem by numbing symptoms. Herein lies the inherent value of this industry and will simply take time to prove it through trails. I have the conviction to continue to invest because I believe in the science. The data to reinforce this is on its way, and I personally want to invest now, knowing that the likelihood of very significant catalysts are probable. Forecasts This of course is the elephant in the room for early investors, later[er] investors and bears alike. Is a $1.5bn market cap pricing in all of the upside already? Is this a $100bn stock? This company has zero revenues, shouldn’t it be worth zero? The truth is, no one knows. There is tremendous risk with this company. However, I will not be selling unless we see some significant negative scientific outcomes. Again, less emphasis on stock price, NASDAQ, more emphasis on the science. Everything else will follow. The various ways to value a company (DCF, sales / earnings multiples, liquidation value etc) all have their issues with an early stage company of this nature. Any sort of bottoms up DCF analysis is just guessing because variables such as patient count, dosage, pricing, market share, market penetration, amongst other have far too much variation to come up with a reliable figure. Discount rates and time horizon can favour your outcome depending on how aggressive / conservative you are. Thus, the way I like to look at this market is a best case scenario for a single drug, based off historical sales data from one company and one drug. This implicitly takes into account patient dosage, competition, market share, market penetration etc, because one drug from one company has already proven its ability to capture such sales data. Data I have broken out annual sales data for various comparable drugs according to MMED’s current pipeline offering. This is the inherent benefit of MMED, is that it has a diverse portfolio covering many underserved issues. Like many of you, I believe MMED’s biggest blockbuster will be Layla, given the problem of Opioid addition plus MMED’s IP rights on 18-MC to corner sales. Suboxone is the current drug on the market due to delayed onset effects ranging from 24-36 hours, compared to someone in withdrawal uses fast acting opioids 3-4 times a day. Suboxone itself however is still addictive and has a long list of negative side effects. Furthermore, it does not correct dopamine dysregulation in patients. The sales of Suboxone alone are growing at an ~9% CAGR, with sales expected to reach ~$4bn in 2028 https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2020/08/18/2079779/0/en/Opioid-Use-Disorder-OUD-in-8-Major-Markets-2018-2028-Reformulations-of-Buprenorphine-Will-Drive-Growth.html. The use case for 18-MC however, does not stop at Opioid addiction, and can be applied to alcohol dependency and smoking dependency among others. This means the TAM for 18-MC could be significantly larger than the existing market captured by Suboxone given its smaller demographics relative to 18-MC. Could Layla exhibit sales greater than Suboxone one day? Who knows. Sticking with comp sales for the analysis for now. Various anxiety, depression and ADHD medication is also shown in the table to show sales potential of Lucy, Albert and the micro dose programmes. Is there a possibility of a LSD, 18-MC, or LSD compound or derivative achieving blockbuster drug status? Do you think there is an inherent benefit to a psychedelic compared to an antidepressant sedative with side effects such as nausea, weight gain etc? Your perceived probability and sales outcomes depends on whether you believe in the science. Those that don’t can easily be skeptical of a $1.5bn market cap many years away from profitability. Those that do, look at the next half a dozen clinical trial outcomes as very probable and thus have applied a less punitive discount to the stock valuation. I have rationalized my decision to invest at $1.5MM because of my own perceived discount rate and confidence in the next 12 months of positive catalysts. Valuation Multiples Now, as many of you know, investors pay a multiple for the future earnings of a company, today. If a drug makes $1bn annually, investors will pay a multiple of future earnings expected over the drugs lifetime, discounted by various factors. There are various metrics to use here, ranging from Enterprise Value / Sales or various types of earnings metrics. MMED is years away from having a real operating company, anything to sell, or even the corporate infrastructure to get it to market. However, the question has always been, how big do you think this company could get? This is where things can get tricky. We used peak annual sales in the last section to forecast comparable estimates for MMED revenues. Thus, I believe it is appropriate to use mature, large cap trading multiples instead of early stage bio techs, as our revenue estimates were mature figures with stabilized growth. If we were to use companies / drugs earlier in their lifecycle or clinical phases, the trading multiples would be much higher because the market is buying potential future sales. Can’t have it both ways. Chart All of the chart data in the graph is specific to the pharma industry. However, there are various subsectors to the industry such as Contract Development Manufacturing and Contract Research Organization. MMED would likely have to partner with each of these types of firms to scale its business, better assess market size etc, but wouldn’t trade at similar multiples given a different business model. Same goes for Packaging and Distribution. The graph also shows S&P average which is a good rule of thumb. Other chart Although the chart gives a good reference point for pharma multiples, I wanted to look at valuation from a more company specific perspective. The chart above shows large cap specialty pharma companies that are publically traded. This will give you an approximate median value of what the market is willing to pay for a company that has a certain amount of sales. As you can see in the green box, industry multiples of EV/EBIITDA or EV/Sales will basically get you to the same place. Median pharma industry EBITDA margins are in the 40% range with EV/Sales at ~4x vs EV/EBITDA of 10x. Note that the above list of trading comps is stale data, as of Sept ’19. I only want to use public data and have refrained from using Bloomberg, Cap IQ etc. Thus the information I’m posting is merely reposts of info available on Google. As you can see, Allergan is listed in this table as a live trading comp, and has since been acquired by AbbVie. Accordingly, I want to highlight some notable M+A activity: Amgen acquires Celgne’s plaque psoriasis drug, Otezla $13.4bn: EV / LTM Sales = 7.6x Thermo Fisher acquires Qiagen for $11.5bn: EV / LTM Sales = 7.3x Abbvie acquires Allergan for $84.2bn: EV / LTM Sales = 5.4x Elanco acquires Bayer’s animal health unit for $7.6bn: EV / LTM Sales = 4.5x As you can see, companies are willing to pay a premium in M&A to acquire competitors and drugs, due to synergies, reduction in SG&A etc. This is a very long winded way of showing that if one of MMED’s compounds hits, and exhibits sales in line with any sort of comparable drug from the table above, this could be a $20-30 billion dollar company (~4bn*5-7x). If several of these drugs reach commercialization, this is potentially a $100 billion dollar company. Now I agree that these projections are completely outlandish right now. I’m simply doing the exercise you all wanted. Feel free to guess at your own forecast sales and multiply out enterprise value using the above metrics. Before you rip me apart for the extreme optimism, I understand that I’m using multiples for stable, reputable, large cap pharma. I understand that there is an extreme amount of stigma attached to psychedelics and achieving ubiquity for these treatments is a large uphill battle. There is an enormous amount of work, luck and time from now until sales and this is not to be under estimated. Do I think MMED is worth $30-$100bn today? No. Do I think MMED is worth somewhere in between today’s valuation and $30-$100bn? Depends whether you believe in the science. If you’re reading this, odds are you do. I invested because I believe it too. So instead, let’s take a lazy man’s approach to valuation and take things one step at a time. Simpler Approach to Valuation The exercise above is to show you all the immense potential of MMED’s drug portfolio. Do I think MMED is the next Pfizer, Abbie Vie or Eli Lilly? No. This is not a $500bn dollar company. However, I do genuinely think there is tremendous upside not factored into the pricing for this stock. Fundamental analysis aside, I think the simplest way to approach valuation is from a catalyst + efficient market hypothesis perspective. Markets are not fully efficient, nor even semi-efficient, but there is some sort of reasoning in believing what the market is willing to pay. The obvious flaws in this are that the market right is riddled with irrational investors and a market of 300m financially illiterate traders isn’t more efficient than an illiquid market of 10 rational ones. As of today’s post there is a discount to the $4.40 price. To me, that’s just more opportunity to continue to scoop up more shares. I have stayed out of the industry in the early days because truthfully I did not know which stocks to pick. Since then, much smarter people than me have done their diligence and allocated their capital to the companies that they believe are winners. This is part of an efficient market hypothesis. Sophisticated capital flowed into MMED @ 4.40 / share, with the expectation to make a profit. I also, invested in this company at $4.9/share, with the expectation to make a profit. If we establish this as a baseline, do we believe there will be more positive than negative catalysts in the next year and in the future, such that we will see accretion in the share price? Conversely, if we see negative outcomes in future catalysts, it will cause erosion in the stock valuation. Below are near term events which should have a significant impact on share price: Project Lucy Phase 2 readout– Q1 2021 Open IND w/ FDA for Phase 2b – Q3 2021 Project Layla Phase 2a study– Second half of 2021 Strategic Pharma Partner Potential – Late 2021 Various Combined MDMA LSD Phase 1 trail – Q1 2021 IV DMT Phase 1 trail – Q1 2021 First ever Phase 2a clinical trial Microdose LSD – Q3 2021 Patent filed for neutralizer technology for LSD to shortestop hallucinogenic effects Game changer for safe, regulated environment for clinical administration Given that Phase 1 studies are focused on safety, what are the odds clinically developed LSD / MDMA fails a safety test? Given that Phase 2 studies are focused on proof of concept and method, what are the odds the clinically designed process fails the test? Believe in the science. Each one of these incremental catalysts derisks MMED, and will bring the valuation closer to ‘blockbuster drug’ status, albeit inches at a time. Just as the bought deal derisked this company for me to participate, achievements in clinical trials will be evidence for more investors to jump in as well. Let’s not get ahead of ourselves and guess at how large this company can get. Just think of what is the next step and do your own evaluation as to whether achieving it is realistic. Once we get through the above list, there will be more milestones to pass such as Phase 2bs and 3s. If we establish $4.40 as the baseline currently and MMED has a successful outcome in any of the previously listed catalysts, there should be a significant accretion in valuation. There is a noticeable omission for most of you, in that I’ve left out the NASDAQ up listing, future dilutions and general capital structuring events. To me, a NASDAQ uplisting is irrelevant. This will add liquidity, although probably more volatility, but changes zero fundamentals about the stock. It should however, add more weight to the efficient market hypothesis and erase the discount I believe this stock is trading at. We’ll see some analyst coverage with price targets that will attract more investors, but the fundamentals of the stock do not change. With respect to stock price, it is impossible to forecast this because the capital structure of this company is completely unknown. IF we can even get to revenue generation, and this becomes a $30-100bn company, how much dilution will there be from now until then to back out a share price? The point is that there is so much runway in share price accretion from now until then, that I’m not bothered with anything finance related for this company. There is potential for 50-70x accretion in the value of this company. The focus needs to be on the science. MMED has raised enough money to get though its next set of obstacles and fund operations, thus insolvency risk has fallen away for now which is really the only important financial point for early stage biotech. Let’s take things one step at a time, believe in the science and be patient. Cash position & Expenditures As you can see below, the quarterly burn payroll burn rate is quite low for MMED relative to its cash position. It’s hard to discern which items under their historical expenditures are one off versus recurring, thus difficult to calculate their exact run rate. However, the huge positive here the low ratio of payroll relative to its cash. Data table Next up we have the projected use of proceeds from their latest raise, net of underwriter expenses. Now that the Over-Allotment has been exercised, MMED has additional capital that it has further allocated to Albert, Lucy, Layla and the Microdose LSD program. Proceeds Table General takeaway is that MMED is well enough capitalized to get through its next phase of milestones. I will be keeping an eye on news surrounding the Microdose LSD program. Estimates at this stage for Phase 2a are $3-4m and the results of which will inform capital expenditures required for future phases. A positive milestone in Q3 ’21 should be an incredibly positive catalyst for this company. Proving that you’ve raised capital and have enough cashflow to get to the next step doesn’t guarantee we’ve picked the winner in the industry. It does however give me confidence that MMED will continue to be a going concern for at least the short term and get to a point when new investors can come in at a much higher valuation. This is a real risk for the penny stocks out there without capital or IP, and that is the reason I chose MMED. Edit: Did some re-formatting to make it easier to read cause it's pretty lengthy and there's a lot of details. Hopefully it helps. Edit #2: I went back into the trash compacter and salvaged the original data and charts since some people were asking. The resolution may be questionable, so apologies for that, you might have to zoom in.
SoFi (IPOE) - Jack of All Trades, Master of None? A Sorely Needed Bearish DD
Reposting because last post didn’t seem to go through due to network errors. Disclosure: I have no position in IPOE, nor will I ever initiate one. Disclaimer: Not a financial advisor. Do your own DD. Note: I did this write-up for a friend; it’s obscenely long. If nobody here reads it, I won’t be particularly upset. But I’m posting it on the off-chance someone will find it interesting. I have seen a significant number of comments, in the daily threads and elsewhere, in which people call SoFi their “long-term fintech hold” or otherwise declare their intention to hold IPOE/SoFi significantly longer than a trader playing SPACs typically would - in some cases, all the way through merger and into the great unknown. Heck, I’ve even seen some commenters describe it as a “forever hold.” If that describes you, I would strongly suggest you think twice about that decision. For months, the #1 piece of advice on this sub, beyond all else, has been to buy pre-rumor, post-Bloomberg rumor, or on an LOI - as close to NAV as possible - and sell shortly after the DA bump. Additionally, SPACs that have seen significant declines in their share prices in the days/weeks/months following a DA, as most do, could often be ripe for buying in anticipation of a run-up to the merger date. Buying after a huge run-up, with intentions of holding for the “long-term,” is hardly a strategy that can reasonably be expected to generate good risk-adjusted rates of return, especially in such a wildly speculative corner of the market. In other words, it seems the players are becoming consumed by the game, and forgetting the rules in the process. Fascinatingly, this is an almost universal characteristic of frothy, speculative market bubbles. During the initial phase of the dot-com bubble, most retail investors were buying into pre-revenue, cash-incinerating companies at IPO, believing - often correctly - that hype would build for the company (it just has so much potential!!!) and that, as a result, they could subsequently flip those shares to another buyer at a significantly higher price. For a while, they were right. So what went wrong? Retail traders started to truly believe. It was no longer a case of playing the “greater-fool” game. They no longer bought shares and held them until other people started to believe in the potential of those companies; they started to genuinely believe in the narratives those companies were crafting and the vision of the future they were presenting to their investors. Instead of selling the sales pitches, they began falling for them. Eventually, the pool of capital sitting idle waiting to be deployed into the next “game-changing” company dried up…and the rest, I suppose, is history. Which brings me to SoFi. Specifically, why their nosebleed valuation is not particularly attractive and the downside risks are, at least on this sub, massively under-appreciated. To begin, let’s take a brief look at the history of the company, something that most posters on this sub seem to have surprisingly little knowledge of. In the aftermath of the Great Financial Crisis, the big banks massively de-leveraged their consumer lending portfolios. Student loan debt was one of the primary targets during this de-leveraging campaign, because, despite being non-dischargeable in bankruptcy proceedings (at least for now), it is, like most non-collateralized loans, quite risky for lenders. As such, the big banks became quite hesitant to issue new student loan debt - or refinance existing debt - at reasonable interest rates. Enter SoFi. SoFi, founded in 2011, attempted to capitalize on this opportunity. By offering to consolidate and refinance student loans, especially for high-earning recent college graduates, at reasonable interest rates, SoFi began putting together a large customer base that it believed it could easily cross-sell other financial products to - home loans, banking services, wealth management services, and the like. Backed by some of the most prestigious VC firms and investors, it looked like a sure winner. And, briefly, it was. Even as their marketing budget exploded, in early 2017 SoFi, believe it or not, actually expected to turn a profit of $200 million on $650 million in revenue. The same year, SoFi entered M&A talks with Charles Schwab, but ultimately talks fell apart when Schwab balked at the $8-10B valuation SoFi was seeking. Nonetheless, things were looking very good for the company. And then everything went very, very wrong. SoFi, which had made a name for itself by offering student loan refinancing to prime borrowers from elite schools with very high incomes, saw its loans start to massively underperform expectations. Nonetheless, despite a massive $200M write-down in Q2 on underperforming loans, it still managed to book a $126 million profit on $547 million in revenue, though company guidance indicated that they expected further deterioration in the performance of their loan portfolio in the coming year. Those dire expectations seem to have been borne out; by 2018, the company was deep in the red, with EBITDA of -$227 million for the year. Their cross-selling model, which they are still describing as a key part of their business strategy, seems to have failed catastrophically - by early 2018, SoFi’s home loans were losing the company an astounding $10,000 apiece, on average. And thus began the company’s long and hard dive into the red, from which it has not yet recovered. The decline was - to put it bluntly - catastrophic. Revenues collapsed, with 2018 revenues declining over 50% YoY to $241M. Desperate to save their rapidly-failing business, investors determined that they would need to start buying growth - at almost any cost. The company’s marketing and advertising spending shot through the roof, culminating in a deal to buy the naming rights to the LA Rams/Chargers stadium for an eye-popping $400 million. So how much growth has the >$500M in spending since then actually bought them? Let’s see. To take a look at where things currently stand, let’s take a look at their shockingly amateurish investor presentation. (As a brief aside - for anyone still doubtful that the company is selling hype, just take a quick glance through their investor presentation. It’s littered with the logos and names of the most egregiously overvalued tech companies currently on the market (why on Earth should the name “Tesla” appear anywhere in their pitch deck, other than under an executive’s name??). And ”AWS of fintech?” Seriously?). Interestingly, their presentation claims that the company is targeting “high earners not well served (HENWS) ages 22+ predominantly earning $100,000+.” Sound familiar? It’s precisely the strategy that monumentally failed the company, beginning in Q2 2017. And, perhaps most intriguingly, it’s a strategy the CEO disavowed just last year, when he promised SoFi’s investors he would allow trading in fractional shares to target individuals who “can’t afford to buy their first stock”, and therefore, as the WSJ reporter notes, would be “unlikely to have expensive degrees from fancy schools.” In other words, SoFi was going to additionally target a completely different - and much less valuable - client base for their brokerage platform. But what’s the issue, you say? After all, shouldn’t companies be nimble, and rapidly adjust their strategy to reflect changing conditions in their target markets? And maximize market share at almost any cost? Perhaps. Or perhaps not. In my opinion, SoFi, in their investor presentation, is now attempting to massively oversell the value of their current client base. Their user growth does, admittedly, seem somewhat impressive. But it appears to come at an incredibly high cost. Their financial services segment, where presumably most recent user growth has been generated, is obscenely unprofitable. Last year, it reported a $133M loss on $11M in revenue. It’s also quite clear that the growth there is decidedly inorganic, and therefore the staying power of those gains is questionable at best. That said, the biggest problem here is the shockingly low revenue figures, which I believe indicate that SoFi is acquiring massive numbers of “low-value” customers, and paying out the nose to do so. I know everyone here (myself included) loves to hate on Robinhood, but...in the 2Q 2020, their trading platform generated $180M in revenue, just from selling order flow. IN A SINGLE QUARTER. I really hate to admit it, but that’s incredibly impressive. On an annualized basis, RH is generating an incredible $55 ARPU by selling order flow. And it’s important to remember that SoFi’s user base is incredibly small, in comparison. In 2020, their “SoFi Invest” platform had a paltry 334k users. RH had over 13 million. SoFi, however, projects 150% YoY growth for their brokerage platform. To be completely honest? I think that’s bullshit. The massive influx of retail traders into the market due to COVID has already happened. And, to put it bluntly, Robinhood won. Sure, there may be something of a minor exodus from the platform due to their incredibly poor handling of the whole meme stock fiasco. But, seriously...you think those disgruntled traders will be going to SoFi? A platform with very limited capabilities (they still don’t have options trading?!) and a clunky UI that doesn’t even offer margin trading?! “But not everybody trades options! Surely at least some of the Robinhood exiles will land at SoFi!!” Yes, this is probably true. But, unfortunately, options traders are the real cash cows for these discount brokerages. Of the $180M in revenue RH generated in Q2 last year, $111M was from selling order flow on options. That’s an absolutely massive 62%. And those traders now only have 2 choices: they are either going to forgive RH and stick with them, or move to a big-boy broker like TDA, Vanguard, Fidelity, or IBKR.The reality is this: only the least valuable Robinhood customers are likely to land at SoFi. Acquiring the more valuable customers further down the line will be incredibly expensive, if not outright impossible. But SoFi is more than a brokerage firm, so let’s stick a valuation on that portion of their business and move on. Robinhood is planning a $20B IPO; let’s say the market triples that and gives it a 60B valuation. Robinhood, as of EoY 2020, has roughly 40x as many users, and their users are MUCH more valuable based on ARPU figures. But let’s be incredibly generous and value SoFi Invest at $2B. Let’s see what else SoFi has to offer. The vast majority (83%, to be exact) of their revenue comes from their lending platform, which offers primarily student loan consolidation and refinancing and personal loans. Because both types of loans are non-collateralized, let’s treat them as identical. So how much are other student loan providers worth? Turns out, not a whole lot. Navient, for example, trades at just 6x earnings. At that multiple, SoFi’s lending operations would be worth just $500 million. But they’re a tech company, right!! So let’s multiply that by a factor of 10 for no reason whatsoever and agree that SoFi’s lending operations are worth $5B. Finally, we have Galileo, their “technology platform.” What is Galileo? It’s primarily a payments processor, but it also provides bank account infrastructure services. Last year, it generated $103M in revenue; that same year, it was acquired by SoFi for $1.2B. Let’s assume, for no good reason, that SoFi underpaid by a factor of 3, and value Galileo at $3.6B. (Note that this is 36x revenue; another payment processor, Payoneer, just announced a DA with FTOC. At the current trading price, the market is valuing Payoneer at roughly 10x revenue.) At Friday’s closing price, the implied valuation of SoFi is roughly $20B. Even with the silliest assumptions I could stomach, that’s at least double what I came up with. Yes, there have been a number of very positive changes at the company over the last 2 years. Their home loan business appears to at least generate them a small profit, and their unsecured debt portfolio appears to be much less risky that it was when things turned south in mid-2017. But rectifying some of their previous failures can hardly justify their massively bloated current valuation; even with ridiculous, completely unjustified multiples like the ones I arbitrarily chose above, there’s simply no way that kind of valuation can be justified. Which brings us full circle. I don’t have a clue what the short-term price action of IPOE stock will look like. If I did, I would have opened a position in it last Friday. But I can assure you that the current implied valuation is completely nonsensical. Maybe you will buy the stock, and find a “greater fool” to sell it to at a much higher price sometime in the near future. Perhaps you will double your money overnight. Maybe you will hold it for 10 years, and by then SoFi will have eclipsed even JP Morgan. Despite the decidedly unexceptional nature of all of their offerings, maybe the “one-stop-shop” approach to personal finance will make them an unstoppable juggernaut. But understand that you’re making a gamble. A huge gamble. On a company that is attempting to execute a solid turnaround strategy, but has not yet succeeded. My advice? Stick to the tried and true strategy of this sub. As difficult as it may be sometimes, do not forget the rules of the game. In almost all cases, once you stop playing the game, the game plays you. GLTA.
6) CashOut. CashOut is on the top charts as players love playing the amazing game. This is one of the best games that pay real money through PayPal. CashOut helps individuals play mobile games, daily check-ins, referrals, completing offers, taking surveys, watching videos and a lot more. Need to earn some money because you lost hours or even worse, lost your job? In the COVID-19 era, there are still ways to earn money by using game apps to win real money.. If you love playing games on your phone and you aren’t getting paid for it then you may want to check out these mobile apps to win real money on iPhone and Android phones. BrainBaazi is the best game to earn money and increase general knowledge. It includes different-different games such as Live Trivia Games, live quiz games, bingo game & live poll game with different prize money and timing. Afternoon game Trivia quiz game started at 1:00 PM from Monday to Friday with prizing amount Rs. 20,000, after that PollBaazi show at 3:00 PM with Rs. 5,000 prize money, bingo game at 4:30 PM with Rs. 20,000 prize money, evening game Trivia quiz game at 8:30 PM ... Givling is the best trivia game to play and earn money online. They are in the industry for the last 5 years, since 2015. You can play games for real money apps. They are also on Play Store but not have many users there, they have only 500 downloads. But most of their users are from the web. Even though there aren’t much video games that feature an opportunity to earn real money, there are several impressive projects that allow to legally exchange and sell resources on auctions, or even create your game servers and monetize them. Still, you have to explore all features when you choose the best MMORPG to make real money in 2020. My current favorite games to play to earn money are Wheel of Fortune, Solitare Rush, Angry Birds, and Scrabble Cubes. If you wanted to try it out, be sure to claim a $10 sign up bonus here. There's something for everyone, including popular games like Bejeweled 2, Jeopardy, Wheel of Fortune, Tetris, Spades, and Scrabble. This website isn't free, as it requires a deposit of $5, 10, or 20 to begin playing for real money. Many people earn anywhere from $500 to $1,500 per month simply by playing real money-earning games in their free time. Sites and Apps That Pay You to Play Games . While you can only earn virtual money or credits with many online games, there are some that you can play for real cash. If you’re not interested in becoming a professional gamer but want to earn some easy cash each month playing ... Best Real Money Games Apps. If you want to turn your passion for playing video games into a side hustle then you can definitely get paid to play games and win real money. Ready to recap on the best gaming apps that pay real money? Here is a recap of the best apps that pay you real money for playing games: Mistplay is the app that pays you to play games, but it is only available on Android ... At best, these games are gambling and highly-skilled players are likely to have a huge advantage. You’ll be more likely to lose money than make it with these games. At worst, these games will ...
Earn PayPal Money by Playing Games (2020!) - YouTube
Want To Make Money Online But Don’t Know Where To Start?Click Here ️ ️ ️ https://success.lunchbreaklaunch.com/startCheck out these 10 websites that will leg... Make $36 per hour to JUST PLAY VIDEO GAMES! This is for anyone ages 13 and up. For Add me on IG/TikTok @DrJustinHouser 🔴 Subscribe for more tips just like ... Earn money playing games - online income bd 2019New Earning Site https://youtu.be/W6k0_WF2eHsFor Help :Telegram Group - http://bit.ly/2IwWP1mWhatsapp Group -... Earn PayPal Money by Playing Games (2020!)Watch this Related Video https://youtu.be/dpQ9rmN1TXAIn this video I will show you how to earn paypal money and ... #paypal #paypalmoney #earnpaypal #gameshackMAKE SURE YOUR SUBSCRIBE IN MY YOUTUBE CHANNEL FOR THE MORE INFORMATION ABOUT HACKING COURSE, APP OF BETTING AND ... teen patti real cash game best app 2021 How to earn moneyjoin our telegram ...Trick Earninghttps://t.me/TrickEarning1App link...Win Huge Money by Playing ...
