与「OPTION」相关的搜索结果

And thank you to the Morgan Stanley trading crew in “Mission Control” sculpting the debut of $SPCX today. Here is the moment of first trade. P.S. Elon finally agreed to the IPO greenshoe options… but only if the bankers all wore green shoes. 👟 —> Mementos for all.

INSANE: 🇺🇸 The SpaceX IPO is expected to create 4,000 MILLIONAIRES. SpaceX paid lower salaries for years and handed out stock options instead. Tomorrow, that bet pays out at $1.8 TRILLION. Roughly 400 of them are set to be worth $100 MILLION or more.

这两周的抄底清单：我最想持有的AI股票五大梯队 今天上午答应了大家，晚上就整理出来一份清单。 过去两周市场波动很大。趁着这次回调，我把自己的观察名单重新梳理了一遍。 先说一个前提，这不是涨幅排行榜。不代表第一梯队一定比第五梯队涨得多。 很多第五梯队的股票，未来涨幅可能远超第一梯队。 这个榜单更多代表我对未来1-3年：基本面，估值。市值空间，稳定性，持仓体验和叙事空间综合之后的风险收益比排序。这不是比谁最会涨的最猛，是谁最值得长期持有。 按照未来几年的AI瓶颈来看，我会给叙事这么排名，没说到的叙事不代表不好。 1. 存储 2. 光互连、光通信 3. 算力与基础设施 4. 能源 5. AI应用。 未来几年我认为最值得关注的是：存储 → 光互连 → Scale-Across → 电力 → Physical AI。 如果不想选股，其实也很简单。存储直接看 DRAM ETF。光通信直接看 FOTO ETF。能源直接看AIPO ETF。这三个ETF基本覆盖了我最看好的三个方向。 第一梯队（AI基础设施核心层) : NVDA, MU, SNDK, TSM, AVGO, MRVL, INTC。 这是AI扩张最底层的基础设施。NVDA = 算力，MU / SNDK = 存储，TSM = 制造，AVGO = ASIC + 网络，MRVL = 连接，INTC = AI服务器CPU + 网络 + Foundry Option。如果未来AI Capex继续增长，这一层最先受益，也是确定性最高的一层。 第二梯队（高确定性重估）: LITE, NOK, COHR, MSFT, ORCL,QCOM, NET。 第三梯队（AI基础设施扩张受益) : CRWV, NBIS, IREN, DELL, AAOI, ONTO, AMKR。 这一层是AI扩张越快，这些公司订单越多。但没有第一梯队那么不可替代。 第四梯队（数据层与软件层): SNOW, MDB, NOW, CRM, PLTR。 AI最终会落到数据和应用层。 第五梯队（未来主题与高Beta) : TSLA, OUST, BB, CEG, OKLO, SMR, NVTS, WOLF, SOFI, HOOD, CRCL 这一层并不是不看好。相反很多都是我长期关注的公司。这里面包含Physical AI, 机器人, 自动驾驶, AI-RAN,核电, 电力, 金融基础设施,很多公司的上限非常高。只是波动更大，兑现周期更长。 如果只能选5个，再帮大家筛选一下，我会直接把选股变成选赛道。 1. DRAM ETF 2. FOTO ETF 3. NVDA 4. MRVL 5. NOK DRAM覆盖存储。FOTO覆盖光通信。NVDA代表算力。MRVL代表连接。NOK代表Scale-Across和DCI。而且FOTO里面没有MRVL和NOK。刚好补齐我最看好的两个方向。 未来几年如果AI继续扩张，我认为最大的机会依然会围绕: 存储 → 光互连 → Scale-Across展开。这也是为什么最近市场大跌之后，我最优先关注的仍然是这几个方向, AI硬件股还是下半年确定性最高的板块，不过也可以同时关注老黄说的AI应用，Physical AI和Edge AI板块。

There has been a lot of hand wringing on the appropriate valuation of SpaceX. Some large institutions believe SpaceX can only be valued at half what the market seems to be willing to pay for it. Others are claiming it has 15X appreciation ahead of it. Almost all of this difference of opinion comes down to how comfortable you are modeling beyond 2030 and what valuation method you use. 2030 valuation using a traditional Gordan DCF produces a very different result than a 2040 EV/EBITDA Multiple. Both have pros and cons. Most analysts don’t really discuss this and lead with a headline number. We are very comfortable modeling out to 2040, as large portions of what SpaceX is proposing is real world infrastructure, which provides modelable physics constraints to anchor against. The analysis we released today explores this in-depth, its open to the public all the way through IPO. I highly encourage you check it out prior to then. We’ve run 5,000 monte carlo runs across 500 variables (real number, even though it sounds fake) and three valuation methods. This video is of a 3D cloud chart showing every simulation outcome expected in valuation output across two of the most impactful variables to the model when using an EV/EBITDA multiple from 2026 to 2040. The horizontal axis is the steepness of the orbital data center demand S-curve. The vertical axis is the rate at which chip compute efficiency becomes cheaper. Each of the 5,000 dots is one simulated future; green dots are the ones where SpaceX's 2040 value clears the $1.77T IPO line, over time. Under EV/EBITDA valuation through 2040, 96% of our simulated futures clear the expected IPO price once the bell rings Friday. We aren’t publishing this publicly to tell investors what the stock is worth, we’re publishing this to help investors understand the world of outcomes, what the fundamentals suggest through 2040, and what frankly most analysis simply won’t share. SpaceX is a generational company working on long term infrastructure harnessing a domain no one has been able to tap in so far: space. It deserves doing the work as an investor. because this in not financial advice. The cleanest way to hold SpaceX is a bond stapled to a call option (AI-Compute); Starlink is the bond, the near term SatCom annuity that funds the next flywheel. Understand the world of outcomes and take your position accordingly. Comparables and P/E won't take you far enough.

It is with a heavy heart that we announce we are winding down the Botanix network. This decision is the hardest one we have made in four years, and we want to share the reasoning openly because the people who backed us, built with us, and used what we shipped deserve more than a quiet shutdown notice. First off, an immediate practical consideration for the Botanix community: please withdraw your Bitcoin and other assets before July 9th, 2026. When we started in 2022, the pitch was simple enough to say in a sentence: bring real utility to Bitcoin. What that actually meant in practice, and what we have spent nearly four years building toward, was more ambitious than that sentence made it sound. We were trying to build a Bitcoin-based blockchain that could find genuine product-market fit as a platform for Bitcoin applications, without using token incentives to drive growth, manufacture users, or simulate utility. Almost every chain that has launched in the last cycle has reached for the same playbook (issue a token without PMF, engineer the incentive surface, point at the resulting metrics), and we did not believe this route is a viable strategy in the long term. We wanted to know whether a Bitcoin chain could earn its users on the strength of what was built on top of it, the value it brings in the market with Bitcoin itself as the only meaningful economic primitive in the system. And we built it. The Spiderchain went live and stayed live, a year of mainnet operation with one hundred percent uptime and zero security incidents on a genuinely novel cryptographic architecture. We built Dynafed, a dynamic federation that turned the Spiderchain from a static multisig set into a rotating, decentralized one, the technical milestone that most people in this space said could not be built on Bitcoin without compromising trust assumptions. Twenty-five million transactions, two hundred thousand wallets, and tens of millions of dollars in assets moved across the chain, every single number of that earned organically without a token, without airdrops, without points programs, or any of the manufactured-demand machinery. Chainlink, Morpho, GMX, Dolomite, Fireblocks, Alchemy, Galaxy, OKX Wallet, all integrated. We shipped a Bitcoin neobank with BINK on iOS and Android, with self-custodial email login for Bitcoin (something that had never existed before), native Bitcoin yield, and the lowest borrowing rates against Bitcoin anywhere in the world, all of it downstream of owning the infrastructure. The point of saying this is not to argue with our own conclusion. The protocol works, the product works, and our team and ecosystem worked in concert to do exceptional work. We have run this experiment in earnest, with a working protocol, real applications, and a serious team, for over a year on mainnet and nearly four years in total. The honest answer we have arrived at, after living inside it every day, is that it did not work, at least not in this market and not on this timeline. We want to share what we think we learned, with the caveat that some of this is conviction and some of this is still suspicion, and we would rather be transparent about the difference than pretend to have clarity we do not have. The first thing I've had to sit with is timing. Bitcoin utility, making Bitcoin programmable, productive, and integrated into real financial activity, isn't where the real world users sit right now. The conversation is still on Bitcoin as a reserve asset, on its monetary and political positioning, on base-layer conservatism. Those questions are upstream of the ones a Bitcoin L2 needs people to be asking. I still believe Bitcoin gets there, but belief in the destination is not the same as being able to predict when, and nobody can. It's also possible the destination never materialises at all, and that Bitcoin's role as a reserve asset is simply where it settles. If that's true, there will never be a market for what we were building, and no amount of time or capital would change that. The second is the token question. We intended to eventually launch a token. We saw it, and still see it, as a genuinely new form of equity, something closer to an IPO than an airdrop, to be done when you reach product market fit and the moment is right. That moment never came. What became clear over the last year is that the market largely stopped rewarding even the more considered versions of that playbook. Token launches across the board have broadly underperformed, and those that did go to market with tokens haven't seen the outcomes or PMF that the model is supposed to produce. The third lesson is about where DeFi demand on Bitcoin actually lives. For most use cases that exist today, lending, yield, leveraged exposure, WBTC on a mature general-purpose L2 is genuinely sufficient. Users have voted with their behaviour, and the verdict is that the trust assumptions of a wrapped representation on Ethereum are acceptable to almost everyone who wants Bitcoin-denominated DeFi. Decentralisation matters to people in principle and in conversation; in practice, when something cheaper and easier is in front of them, they use it. The security case for a dedicated Bitcoin L2 is real, but it only matters for a narrower band of applications than our thesis required, one of the clearer lessons this market has taught us. The fourth lesson is structural. The on-chain economy is consolidating around venues that own the user relationship: Hyperliquid, Robinhood, the major CEXes, and now TradFi participants absorbing an ever-larger share of attention, flow, and revenue. Convenience and institutional credibility win, every time, as soon as they're available. As retail participation thins, that concentration only deepens. We were, and still are, believers in decentralisation, but the current direction of on-chain growth is running through distribution, and any team building base-layer infrastructure today is rowing upstream against that current. We were no exception. The fifth lesson is the most concrete. Both of the above played out directly in our economics. The users we attracted were primarily using Bitcoin as a store of value for yield, a legitimate use case, but not the high-frequency transaction volume that drives fee revenue on a network like ours. BINK was our answer to that: a Bitcoin neobank designed to bring daily usage of BTC and stablecoins on-chain, driving the transaction volume the network needed. It was the right strategic instinct, and one we never got the chance to fully test. BINK only landed on both app stores in the last few weeks, a product that by its nature could only be built once the underlying infrastructure was proven and live. When users choose the convenient option and economic gravity pulls toward distribution, what's left on a decentralised infrastructure layer is a user base that costs more to serve than it generates. Infrastructure costs are what they are, and the fee income never came close to covering them. If you would like to see how we were imagining a Bitcoin future and what we have been working on since September, feel free to download BINK and give it a spin: it’s a full-fledged self-custodial Bitcoin Neobank with email login, one click borrowing, a Lightning integration and more. App store: Play store: This UX is where we think Bitcoin is ultimately heading towards although it feels too early. You can use invite code 1SD31R, but remember to remove your funds by July 9th. We could keep going. We have chosen not to, however, because continuing past the point where additional time stops producing additional learning is not conviction, it is something that looks like conviction from the outside while corroding into something else on the inside. We would rather stop now, with integrity intact and resources available to take care of the people who took a chance on us, than push the experiment past the point where it still has something to teach us. Reminder: Please withdraw all your assets by July 9th. After this, the federation will sweep the remaining Bitcoin. Any other assets or tokens on the network from then onwards will unfortunately be unrecoverable. After this, the federation will sweep the remaining Bitcoin. Any other assets or tokens on the network from then onwards will unfortunately be unrecoverable. To our investors, who backed a thesis that was harder to defend than it should have been, to our partners who built alongside us and bet pieces of their own roadmaps on ours, to the developers who deployed on Spiderchain, to our users and the BINK community who showed up for something experimental and stayed, and most of all to the Botanix team who shipped a genuinely novel system with rigour and care and who made every hard day worth the difficulty: Thank you, more than the words available here can carry.