与「BEALIS」相关的搜索结果

POPUP試着会&サンプルセールに 遊びに行ってきました〜💓 みなさんたくさんお買い物しましたよ🛍️ BEARLISのアイテムも一緒に 見ていただけて嬉しいです😌✨ 明日も開催中です💓 よろしくお願いします！ #BEALIS# #SALE# #恵比寿HALO# #熊井友理奈# 🔗

The Narrative Collapsed and Ethereum Is Cheap. Is ETH finally a buy? The Ethereum options market is seeing unusually large put buying activity, with the $1,800 and $1,900 strikes attracting flows running approximately five times above normal levels. Since issuing our high-conviction short on May 16, 2026, Ethereum has declined 10%. But our bearish thesis predates that call. On October 31, 2025, with ETH trading at $3,800, we identified Ethereum as the smarter hedge. Prices have since fallen 47% (see also our interview from November). The thesis was always fundamental. The market is simply catching up. In early April 2026, with Ethereum trading near $2,000, we revisited our fundamental view, examining whether the conditions for a buy had emerged and what the real structural issues were. Today, we return to that question. Ethereum is cheap. But cheap is not the same as a buying opportunity. Fundamentals ultimately determine price; marketing narratives can only sustain a divergence for so long before reality reasserts itself. We have seen that cycle play out once already. So what has changed? Let us approach Ethereum from a different angle entirely. See our full report below.

I asked Claude to apply a capital cycle analysis to $MU. Here's what it came up with: Net reading: 11 of 14 capital cycle signals are bearish or strongly bearish. The framework reads this as late-cycle, not early/mid-cycle. The two unambiguously bullish signals (equipment lead times, industry concentration) are eroding rather than strengthening. Insights Yielded by Capital Cycle Analysis: 1) "Structural change" rhetoric is itself diagnostic. The capital cycle framework treats coordinated industry-wide CEO claims of regime change as evidence of late-cycle euphoria. The same language was deployed by the same CEOs (Mehrotra at Micron specifically) in 2017–2018 and was wrong. Bayesian base rates argue against accepting the current claims at face value. The previous analysis under-weighted this base-rate evidence. 2) Look at total capital flowing into the supply curve, not just incumbent capex. The structural-change analysis focused on Big Three capex. The capital cycle lens forces aggregation of all capital flowing into memory output: a) Incumbent capex: ~$104B in 2026 across DRAM + NAND; b) CXMT IPO proceeds: ~$4.2B (with state-aligned co-financing many multiples larger); c) YMTC capacity additions (privately financed) d) Substitute technology capital (Cerebras, photonic startups, CXL controller designers) — billions of dollars of equity raised to reduce HBM intensity per dollar of AI compute deployed. When aggregated, total effective supply-side capital formation in 2026 is materially higher than the Big Three capex alone suggests. The supply response is being underestimated. 3) The customer base is doing exactly what late-cycle customers do. Hyperscalers locking in 3–5 year LTAs, pre-ordering 2027 NAND, building strategic inventory — these are not signs of confident long-cycle visibility, they are signs of late-cycle scarcity panic. Historically (DRAM 2017–2018, oil 2008, shipping 2007), customer pre-buying at peak prices is followed by sharp inventory destocking when prices roll over. The structural-change narrative frames LTA penetration as a benefit; the capital cycle frames it as a peak signal. 4) Multiple expansion + earnings expansion = asymmetric downside. The previous analysis flagged the 15x NTM P/E multiple as aggressive (referring to UBS PT raise). The capital cycle framework sharpens this: when both earnings and multiple are at peak, the compound drawdown when either reverts is severe. Memory historically goes from 60% gross margin to negative gross margin and from 10x P/E to <5x P/E. Even a modest reversion to 35% gross margin and 8x P/E from current levels implies a 60–75% equity drawdown for the memory primaries — without any disorderly cycle. 5) Supply lag is real but not unique. The bullish point about EUV/TSV/hybrid bonding lead times is correct but mis-weighted. The capital cycle history of other capital-intensive industries (oil refining, shipbuilding, semiconductor wafer fab) shows that long lead times increase the eventual amplitude of the down-cycle: capital decisions made at peak are not reversible when conditions soften, leading to capacity overhang. Long lead times delay the down-cycle; they do not abolish it. 6) China is the textbook capital-cycle disruptor. In Chancellor's historical case studies (steel, shipbuilding, solar, panels, batteries), state-backed Chinese entrants repeatedly compressed margins of consolidated Western/Korean/Japanese oligopolies once technology gaps narrowed. The U.S. equipment restrictions on China have created the illusion that this dynamic is paused, but the data shows CXMT doubled DRAM share in 18 months and is targeting domestic HBM3. The structural-change analysis appropriately flagged this; the capital cycle framework would weight it heavier as the single most important multi-year risk. 7) Substitute capital formation is its own supply curve. The capital cycle framework treats financing flows into substitutes as a parallel supply expansion. Cerebras' $5.5B IPO, Marvell's $5B Celestial acquisition, the Sandisk/SK hynix HBF JV, and the CXL ecosystem (ALAB, MRVL, MCHP) are collectively financing "HBM intensity reduction." Even if HBM unit demand is met, the value capture per dollar of AI compute is diluted. Capital is flowing in adjacent to the memory primaries to reduce the share of AI spend that ends up in their P&L. 8) The bull case relies disproportionately on demand visibility. The capital cycle warns against demand-anchored theses. The bull case requires AI capex to continue at current levels or accelerate, hyperscaler ROI economics to remain favorable, sovereign AI to scale, and inference workloads not to migrate to non-HBM architectures. Each of these is plausible; the joint probability that all hold through 2028 is materially lower than the headline narrative suggests. 9) Sell-side estimate trajectory is itself a signal. UBS's PT trajectory ($535 → $1,625, a 3x increase in one revision) is historically associated with peak euphoria. Estimate revisions of this magnitude have a poor forward record. The framework would treat the velocity of estimate revisions as a contra-signal. 10) Where the asymmetry sits. The capital cycle framework reframes the risk/reward calculation. Even if the bull thesis is right and earnings hold through 2028, the upside from current levels is modest (multiple expansion has already happened). If the bull thesis is partially wrong — say, 2028 brings 25% peak-to-trough EPS decline rather than 50% — the equity drawdown is still material because multiples will compress simultaneously. The asymmetry is not favourable at current valuations. Bottom line: The structural change thesis was directionally correct but materially overweighted by the original analysis. The capital cycle framework appropriately reweights toward supply-side caution and treats current peak conditions, peak valuations, peak management confidence, and accelerating capital inflows as a coherent set of late-cycle signals. The memory industry has undergone real and beneficial structural change in shape, but the empirical base rate against the "cycle has been abolished" claim is overwhelming. The economic characteristics of memory businesses have improved but have not been transformed into stable, compounding, low-volatility ones — and the next 18–30 months are statistically more likely to mark the end of this up-cycle than a transition to a new regime.

leopold aschenbrenner just released his fund's latest investment portfolio & honestly its not what i expected he's gone massively short the entire semiconductor supply chain but also revealed what he thinks the next AI constraint is: > biggest surprise: he's short intel. he sold out of his massive Intel position that made him famous. > he's also gone short $9B worth of puts in nvidia, asml, amd, oracle and van ecks semi etf. > biggest long positions are in memory (sandisk) and power (bloom) with a combined $3.5B value (these are his next bottlenecks) > he trimmed ~$1B of bloom energy position but still holds $1 billion of it. his single largest long holding. > his lumentum position is gone (bearish optics?) > the one consistent thesis is he continues to hold data center bets (ai labs will still need gpus) > fund is now worth $13.7 billion (notional). it was just $5.5B 3 months ago and $220 million ~1yr ago

100+ places to launch your startup: 1. Product Hunt 2. BetaList 3. TrustMRR 4. Uneed 5. TinyLaunch 6. Indie Hackers 7. Hacker News 8. Tiny Startup 9. PeerPush 10. SideProjectors 11. DevHunt 12. Launching Next 13. Microlaunch 14. Launch Directories 15. StartupBase 16. ShowMeBestAI 17. Trendy Startups 18. Software Advice 19. There's an AI for that 20. AlternativeTo 21. OpenAlternative 22. SaaSHub 23. Toolfolio 24. LibHunt 25. SaaS Genius 26. FoundrList 27. Stacker News 28. PitchWall 29. API List 30. MakerPad 31. Dan Recommends 32. Startup Buffer 33. AppSumo 34. SEO Wins 35. RocketHub 36. StackSocial 37. SaaS Mantra 38. SaaS Warrior 39. LTD Hunt 40. KEN Moo 41. Prime Club 42. SaaSZilla 43. Fazier 44. Peerlist 45. Next Gen Tools 46. Sustainability Softwares 47. Saas Baba 48. PromptZone 49. Futurepedia 50. Toolkitly 51. LaunchIgniter 52. Firsto 53. Indie Tools 54. Manta 55. Indie Deals 56. PayOnceUseForever 57. Slocco 58. ToolFame 59. GPTStore 60. AlterOpen 61. SaaS Gallery 62. Aura Plus Plus 63. That AI Collection 64. BasedTools 65. SaaS Pirate 66. Product Canyon 67. Deal Mirror 68. Dealify 69. Goodfirms 70. AI Agent Store 71. BroUseAI 72. Altern 73. BestWebDesignTools 74. MadGenius 75. BotsFloor 76. AIDir Wiki 77. Look AI Tools 78. The AI Generation 79. Waild World 80. Wavel 81. Indie Products 82. Invent List 83. Hack the Prompt 84. Startup Heroes 85. AI Marketing Directory 86. RankYourAI 87. EarlyHunt 88. Tekpon 89. Dokey AI 90. Appscribed 91. Open Tools 92. SEOFAI 93. Startups FYI 94. AI Tool Trek 95. Powerusers 96. AI Parabellum 97. Serchen 98. RobinGood 99. Affiliate Watch 100. IndieHunt 101. Reviano 102. Nocode List 103. Software World 104. AIxploria 105. Ctrlalt 106. AI Hunter 107. Public APIs

100+ places to launch your startup: 1. Product Hunt 2. BetaList 3. TrustMRR 4. Uneed 5. TinyLaunch 6. Indie Hackers 7. Hacker News 8. Tiny Startup 9. PeerPush 10. SideProjectors 11. DevHunt 12. Launching Next 13. Microlaunch 14. Launch Directories 15. StartupBase 16. ShowMeBestAI 17. Trendy Startups 18. Software Advice 19. There's an AI for that 20. AlternativeTo 21. OpenAlternative 22. SaaSHub 23. Toolfolio 24. LibHunt 25. SaaS Genius 26. FoundrList 27. Stacker News 28. PitchWall 29. API List 30. MakerPad 31. Dan Recommends 32. Startup Buffer 33. AppSumo 34. SEO Wins 35. RocketHub 36. StackSocial 37. SaaS Mantra 38. SaaS Warrior 39. LTD Hunt 40. KEN Moo 41. Prime Club 42. SaaSZilla 43. Fazier 44. Peerlist 45. Next Gen Tools 46. Sustainability Softwares 47. Saas Baba 48. PromptZone 49. Futurepedia 50. Toolkitly 51. LaunchIgniter 52. Firsto 53. Indie Tools 54. Manta 55. Indie Deals 56. PayOnceUseForever 57. Slocco 58. ToolFame 59. GPTStore 60. AlterOpen 61. SaaS Gallery 62. Aura Plus Plus 63. That AI Collection 64. BasedTools 65. SaaS Pirate 66. Product Canyon 67. Deal Mirror 68. Dealify 69. Goodfirms 70. AI Agent Store 71. BroUseAI 72. Altern 73. BestWebDesignTools 74. MadGenius 75. BotsFloor 76. AIDir Wiki 77. Look AI Tools 78. The AI Generation 79. Waild World 80. Wavel 81. Indie Products 82. Invent List 83. Hack the Prompt 84. Startup Heroes 85. AI Marketing Directory 86. RankYourAI 87. EarlyHunt 88. Tekpon 89. Dokey AI 90. Appscribed 91. Open Tools 92. SEOFAI 93. Startups FYI 94. AI Tool Trek 95. Powerusers 96. AI Parabellum 97. Serchen 98. RobinGood 99. Affiliate Watch 100. IndieHunt 101. Reviano 102. Nocode List 103. Software World 104. AIxploria 105. Ctrlalt 106. AI Hunter 107. Public APIs

Liquidity is not leaving crypto, it is concentrating “Binance has already cleared $1.09 trillion in trading volume in 2026, and we’re only 112 days into the year. That is a huge number for a market people keep calling weak or bearish.” – By @JA_Maartun