Mac retweeted
American-made products are not impossible. Stories about iPhones costing $37,000 or laptops costing $100,000 are psy-ops, sometimes pushed by foreign adversaries but more commonly by American corporations that want anything but an upset to the status quo.
Palmer Luckey says companies are exaggerating the cost of American manufacturing to justify staying in China: “They don’t want to admit that it is a choice.” 🇺🇸🇨🇳
“I don’t have a lot of sympathy for people who pretend that manufacturing in the U.S. is this impossible, order-of-magnitude problem. A lot of it is very self-serving.
They want to justify why they’re in China. They want to justify why it’s OK for them to stay in China. They know that when sanctions hit as a result of a potential Taiwan conflict, they want to say, ‘Nobody could’ve predicted this, and I had no choice anyway.’
They don’t want to admit that it is a choice.
If Chinese subsidized steel is a third of the price of American unsubsidized steel, a tariff isn’t going to work. But if the price difference really is 30%, then a tariff could bring the American steel industry back.
It’s critically important to get this question right, and there aren’t enough people talking about it.”
Mac retweeted
US News media, "it's just students protesting education cuts."
Mac retweeted
To every American, and to everyone watching France burn from abroad:
Do not blame the French people for this.
We never asked for it. We never voted for it. And the one time we were clearly asked, we said no.
Here are the numbers your media won't show you.
70% of the French say there are too many immigrants in France today.
79% want a tougher immigration policy.
77% disapprove of the government's record on immigration.
83% want foreign criminals and long-term unemployed foreigners sent home.
And no, it's not just the old. 69% of French 18 to 24 year olds support suspending legal immigration for three years.
This is not a fringe. This is the French people.
In 2005, we were asked if we wanted the European Constitution. 55% voted no. Three years later, our politicians passed the same text under another name, through parliament, without ever asking us again.
That is modern France in one sentence. The people say no. The elites do it anyway.
So who is responsible? The politicians who lied to us. A class of leaders formed in the same schools, the same forums, the same networks, loyal to each other before they are loyal to their nations.
In 2017, at Harvard, Klaus Schwab, founder of the World Economic Forum, bragged about his Young Global Leaders program in four words: "We penetrate the cabinets." He added that it was true in France. Emmanuel Macron was one of his Young Global Leaders.
It's the same project in Brussels with Ursula von der Leyen and in Paris with Macron. Borders treated as an obstacle. Nations treated as relics. The people treated as a problem to be managed.
What you are watching in France is not the French people failing. It is the end of the globalist project, an abject, quasi-communist dream of a world run by unelected planners. It is collapsing everywhere in Europe at once, and the West has to cut this cancer out before it takes the rest of the body with it.
The peoples of Europe don't want this. They never did.
So when you see our town halls burning, don't say "the French chose this."
The French never chose this.
They were forced into it.
If you're French and you agree, repost this so the world hears it from us.
If you're American, look at us carefully. Then choose differently on November 3rd.
Mac retweeted
Europe gives them free healthcare, free housing, free education, every social program, and a quality of life they could never have back home… yet they will still loot and destroy the West into the third-world.
There is no magic soil.
A nation is simply it’s people.
Mac retweeted
Why is the overall market so fixated on $CRWV's imminent demise?
At the peak of the Dot Com bubble, $CSCO - the largest company in the world, and the $NVDA equivalent of the era - generated about 10% of its revenue from circular deals through vendor-financed startups.
When those startups lost access to capital, $CSCO's revenue growth went from +66% to -30% within a few quarters, and the stock lost 80% of its value. The same story played out across the dot com supply chain, sending the Nasdaq down 80%.
Today, $CRWV alone makes up roughly 8% of
$NVDA GPU sales. Losing that demand is enough to nuke $NVDA's growth story all by itself.
Oh, and $CRWV isn't an isolated example - every major neocloud is hemmoraghing cash and borrowing costs are going UP across the board.
If you lose the neoclouds, you lose the incremental growth driver for marginal data center capacity, and the AI capex trade goes up in smoke.
That's why we're seeing carnage across the entire AI supply chain, from $CAT and $GEV to $MU, $AVGO and more recently $NVDA.
This is what the beginning of the end of a debt-fueled, circular-financed capex bubble looks like.
Mac retweeted
OKAY, THIS IS THE KIND OF THING I’D WANT AI TO HANDLE FOR ME!
Ethmos is launching research agents that track the companies you follow and find their executives on podcasts, including smaller shows you might never come across.
You get a brief each morning with the key points and links to the episodes. So beyond earnings calls, you have more conversations to dig into and learn from, without having to find them all yourself.
🤝 Paid partnership
Mac retweeted
Wall Street is getting $CRWV COMPLETELY WRONG.
I went on Making Money with @cvpayne today to explain why I think this selloff is being blown WAY out of proportion. CoreWeave closed down 15.5% today at $65.78 and a lot of that panic is coming from its bonds. The company's 2032 bonds are now trading below 80 cents on the dollar, pushing yields close to 15%.
For context, CoreWeave issued those same bonds just four months ago at 9.625%. Now, I think a LOT of people are misunderstanding what this actually means. First, CoreWeave is NOT suddenly paying 15% interest on those bonds. The interest rate is locked in at 9.625%. The 15% yield reflects what investors are willing to pay for that debt today and it gives us an idea of how expensive similar unsecured borrowing could be going forward.
And there's a much bigger issue here that people are overlooking. Inflation came in hotter than expected this morning, and the 10 year Treasury yield is sitting around 5.2%. Think about it. If investors can earn over 5% lending money to the US government, why would they take on substantially more risk lending to a company like CoreWeave without demanding a MUCH higher return? That's what we're seeing across the bond market right now, and it's not just a CoreWeave problem.
But here's where I think the market is getting this wrong. CoreWeave just raised $4.2 BILLION at 2.875% three weeks ago. Its Q2 revenue came in at $2.58 billion, more than doubling from a year ago, and its backlog is sitting at $104 BILLION, with another $25 billion in commitments added during early Q3. We're talking about a company with customers like $MSFT, OpenAI, and $META. The demand is there and the contracts are there. The biggest question is how cheaply CoreWeave can finance the infrastructure needed to fulfill those contracts.
And this brings me to $NVDA. I genuinely believe people are underestimating just how important these neocloud companies are to Jensen Huang. Nvidia invested $2 billion into CoreWeave earlier this year and has a $6.3 billion agreement to purchase unused capacity through 2032. Why does that matter? Because Nvidia NEEDS these neoclouds to succeed. The hyperscalers are already developing their own custom AI chips to reduce their dependence on Nvidia. Neoclouds help Nvidia expand its customer base and create another massive distribution channel for its GPUs. Now imagine what happens if these companies suddenly struggle to finance their expansion. That's a massive problem for Nvidia, and I find it very hard to believe Jensen would simply sit back and watch one of his most important customers struggle without exploring ways to support it.
Now, that doesn't mean there aren't risks. My biggest concern with the neocloud trade has always been dilution. If these companies can't borrow at attractive rates, they may have to issue more shares to fund their expansion. And that's something existing shareholders absolutely need to pay attention to. It's also why I think investors need to be selective. Not every neocloud has the same balance sheet, customer commitments, or access to financing. but I don't think the AI infrastructure thesis has suddenly changed because CoreWeave's bonds sold off. The demand for compute is still enormous, and these companies are playing an increasingly important role in meeting it. Short term, interest rates are driving the trade but long term, I still believe the AI infrastructure buildout is one of the biggest investment opportunities of our lifetime.
CoreWeave's CEO just told his own employees the market is acting IRRATIONALLY.
In an email seen by Bloomberg, Michael Intrator wrote that "when you are building a new type of technology company, there will be periods of time when the market misunderstands and acts irrationally." He said CoreWeave's contracted backlog "more than supports" its debt obligations, and that he's confident in its business model, customers and execution.
He also pointed at rivals. He said the weakness and delays around several competitors' attempted IPOs and debt deals are "bleeding into the narrative around CoreWeave." The bond market isn't convinced yet. CoreWeave's unsecured bonds due 2032 traded below 80 cents on the dollar today, according to Bloomberg Law. That's a yield above 15%, and those are levels usually linked to DISTRESS.
But you have to understand the DEMAND. CoreWeave ended June with about $104 billion in backlog, and that doesn't count more than $25 billion in new customer commitments signed early in the third quarter. Q2 revenue more than doubled from a year earlier to $2.58 billion. Intrator says the company is still largely sold out for years. The bear case is the cost of building it. Interest expense hit $640 million last quarter, up from $267 million a year earlier, and CoreWeave lost $626 million in the quarter. It spent $14.1 billion on property and equipment in the first half of 2026, compared with $3.9 billion in the same period last year. That's the whole debate in two numbers. More than $100 billion of contracted demand on one side, and a 15% cost of money on the other.
I am still bullish on $CRWV here.
ALT CoreWeave (CRWV) stock price over the last 6 months, ending near $65
Mac retweeted
My post about France went viral. Thousands of likes. Many Americans told me: "Democrats aren't socialists. America will never be France." I want to answer that seriously, step by step.
Start with a simple observation. Look at what has gotten cheaper in America over the last 25 years: TVs, phones, software, clothes, toys. Now look at what has exploded: college tuition, healthcare, childcare, housing.
What separates the two lists? The first lives in competitive markets. The second is exactly where government is most involved: subsidies, mandates, licensing, zoning, regulation.
College. Washington lends students almost unlimited money. Universities know the money will always come, so they raise tuition and hire more administrators. The student pays the bill for twenty years. More government money, higher prices.
Housing. Why can't a nurse buy a home in the city where she works? Not because of capitalism. Because of zoning laws, permits, environmental reviews, years of procedure to build a single building. The most expensive places to live in America are the places where it's hardest to build. When building is nearly illegal, prices explode.
Healthcare. The patient almost never sees the price. A third party pays, regulations limit who can compete, and costs climb year after year with no one able to say no.
So here is the trap. The problems you suffer from are not the failure of free markets. They are the places where the market has already been replaced by the state. And the solution you're being offered is more of the same.
That's the Trojan horse. It always works the same way. A real problem. A generous-sounding promise. A program that makes things worse. Then the failure of that program becomes the argument for the next one. People who lived under communism in Poland learned to recognize the lie and the mask the lie wears. The lie never presents itself as a lie. It presents itself as compassion.
In France we are at the end of that road. Debt we can never repay. Young people who can't afford a home. Our best people leaving. And every few years our cities burn. Nobody voted for this. They voted for one more generous promise, fifty years in a row.
If you're a Republican, share this with the Democrat in your life. Not to win an argument. To start a conversation.
If you're a Democrat, I'm not asking you to switch teams. I'm asking you to look at the pattern. Wherever the state took over, life became unaffordable. Don't fix the failures of government with more government.
Stay American. Ask for less state, not more.
I’m French. I want to talk to Americans who are about to vote Democrat. Not to insult you. To warn you.
I come from your future.
In France we did everything your progressive politicians promise. Free healthcare, free college, generous welfare, strong unions, heavy regulation, high taxes on the rich, a state that takes care of everything. Public spending close to 57% of GDP, one of the highest on the planet. On paper, it’s the dream.
Here’s what it looks like from the inside. France hasn’t passed a balanced budget since 1974. Our debt is above 3,300 billion euros. Interest on that debt is becoming one of the biggest items in the national budget. Our hospitals are collapsing despite record funding. Our schools rank lower every year. Young people with degrees can’t afford an apartment in the city they were born in. Our best engineers leave for London, Zurich and San Francisco. And the rich you wanted to tax? They left too, and took the jobs with them.
The promise was protection. The result is stagnation.
The worst part is that nobody in France voted for decline. Every single step sounded generous, compassionate, reasonable. One more program. One more regulation. One more tax to fund it. Each step alone makes sense. Fifty years of them, and you wake up in a country that can no longer build a nuclear plant on time or keep its streets safe.
I love America because it’s the one place on earth where people still believe they can build something from nothing. I came to Silicon Valley as a self-taught kid and it changed my life. That spirit is the most precious thing your country has.
Before you vote, ask yourself one question: is the program you’re voting for making America more like America, or more like France?
Trust me. You don’t want to be France.
Mac retweeted
Reading many rebuttals to this post suggests there is little understanding of how Chinese open-source models are able to reach the same level of quality of output as US frontier labs. The bull thesis for neoclouds $NCLD relies on Jevons Paradox: cheaper tokens stimulate enough aggregate demand to keep physical GPU utilization pegged near 100%. However, the token volume surge captured by Chinese open-source architectures (e.g., DeepSeek, Qwen) generates fundamentally fewer hardware billable hours per million tokens compared to dense frontier architectures. Do yourself a favor. Go to any smart LLM and ask this specific question:
“Chinese open-source models often rely on highly optimized Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) architectures. These models require significantly less VRAM and fewer active parameters per inference pass compared to older dense models. Explain to me: 1) What does this mean technologically exactly? 2) How is this driving token pricing lower since June 2026 which marked the peak in neocloud stocks? 3) What kind of impact could this have on GPU rental rates eventually that neoclouds charge?”
Negative for Neoclouds ETF $NCLD
“The most likely long-term outcome of the AI boom will be massive capital destruction in the US, with market share going to cheaper open-source Chinese models.”
bloomberg.com/news/articles/…
Mac retweeted
Honestly, I sold most of my spot crypto and offboarded today. It's just not worth the headache.
I don't want to check every single headline about AI math and cryptography research wondering if I'm about to get rugged. I don't want to wonder if every ancient BTC address making a transfer is ECDSA being cracked.
I had already refocused most of my time and energy on equities at this point, and Justin Drake's post just killed the rest of my desire to hold crypto. This isn't impulsive, I read hours of counterarguments.
1. People say this is incredibly unlikely. I just don't trust any human to predict the capability ceiling of superhuman mathematical AI. Have seen people be wrong about AI capability ceiling over and over.
2. What if I miss the next great bull cycle? Honestly, that's fine, there's plenty of other assets to trade with less stress of existential left tail risk.
3. People say that we would have bigger problems. Yes, I know that banks etc would also be at risk and society would be a clusterfuck, but the government should step in to save my money (and society) at that point. I don't know that they will for crypto. Plus, why would a malicious practitioner rather burn the whole world down over just stealing infinite crypto?
4. People say this is just like Quantum FUD. Nah, this is much more concrete and near term. This doesn't require a new scientific breakthrough, only the continued march of AI progress that we've been scaling on for years.
I got into crypto as a techno optimist but there's other investment expressions of that now. The development of AI (and recently the intersection of bio x AI) is more intellectually interesting to me. Being in crypto feels like being short AI progress, and I do not want to be short AI progress.
This is not investment advice, everyone should decide for themselves how they feel about the topic. I am just one random human being on the internet, expressing my thoughts.
Mac retweeted
T-Mobile spent five years trying to get rid of the exact spectrum Elon just called "the last critical piece" of complete phone coverage in America.
This 800 MHz block is Sprint's old Nextel spectrum, the stuff that powered push-to-talk walkie-talkie phones in 2004. The DOJ forced T-Mobile to divest it as a condition of the $26 billion Sprint merger. Dish had first rights at $3.59 billion and walked away because it couldn't raise the money. T-Mobile finally offloaded it to an investment firm called Grain Management last year for $2.9 billion plus a spectrum swap.
Grain's original plan was selling it to utilities for private networks.
Fourteen months later, SpaceX buys the whole portfolio, and shares of the carriers who passed on it fall as much as 8% in a single afternoon.
Here's why it matters so much. Starlink's satellite signal at 2 GHz can reach your phone outdoors, but it dies at the first wall. 800 MHz penetrates buildings. Most phones already have the band built in. So satellites handle the open sky, this low-band layer handles indoors, and suddenly Starlink Mobile covers everywhere a normal carrier does without the tower network.
Stack the moves. $17 billion for EchoStar's 50 MHz of 2 GHz spectrum. FCC approval for 15,000 Gen2 satellites this week. Now the low-band coverage layer.
Verizon, AT&T, and T-Mobile paid $81 billion in a single auction for C-band spectrum in 2021, then spent years and tens of billions more deploying it on towers. SpaceX assembled a nationwide carrier out of a distressed-asset sale, a forced divestiture castoff, and rockets it already owns.
The walkie-talkie spectrum from 2004 ended up being the piece that lets satellites replace cell towers. Nobody who touched it for twenty years saw that coming.
We announced an agreement to acquire a nationwide low-band spectrum license portfolio that will pave the way for @Starlink to become a major mobile carrier in the US.
With this new spectrum and our Gen2 constellation, Starlink Mobile can ensure Americans have access to high-speed mobile broadband no matter where they are → spacex.com/updates#starlink-…
Mac retweeted
This chart explains exactly why OpenAI and Anthropic will likely end up missing their future revenue forecasts.
Look at what is happening with opensource AI models. Models with open weights now account for nearly 78% of token volume on this AI gateway, compared to just 22% for closed models and that is a HUGE problem for both companies.
As open models continue getting better, developers and enterprises have more reasons to move away from expensive proprietary models. They can run open models themselves, use cheaper inference providers, and avoid paying a premium for every token. That puts pressure on pricing, margins, and ultimately revenue growth. Even if AI usage continues exploding, it doesn't necessarily mean OpenAI and Anthropic will capture all that spending.
But this is actually extremely bullish for the broader AI infrastructure buildout. Even if OpenAI and Anthropic capture a smaller share of AI spending, the demand for compute isn't going anywhere. If anything, cheaper and more accessible models could accelerate AI adoption, driving even more demand for GPUs, memory, networking, power, and data centers.
This is why I continue to be so bullish on the companies supplying the infrastructure behind AI.
Here we go again!
OpenAI reportedly told investors that its annualized revenue was approaching $50 billion at the end of September, not the nearly $70 billion widely reported earlier. The gap appears to come from how OpenAI and Anthropic count revenue. Anthropic reportedly includes sales made through cloud partners such as AWS and Google Cloud, while OpenAI does not include comparable partner sales in the same way.
Investors apparently tried to adjust OpenAI’s numbers to make them comparable with Anthropic’s accounting. That added roughly $20 billion of estimated partner revenue and helped create the $70 billion headline that quickly spread across the media. So OpenAI did not necessarily miss its own revenue target.
Approaching $50 billion is still extraordinary growth. OpenAI ended 2025 above a $20 billion annualized run rate and crossed $40 billion by August, meaning the business has still more than doubled in less than a year. The bigger issue is OpenAI’s spending. The company has committed enormous amounts of capital toward GPUs, data centers, cloud contracts and power. A revenue base that is $20 billion lower than investors believed makes those commitments harder to support and increases OpenAI’s dependence on outside funding.
For NVIDIA, Oracle and other AI infrastructure companies, this does not mean compute demand is collapsing. OpenAI is still growing rapidly and needs more infrastructure, but the gap between the revenue it generates and the money it plans to spend is now larger than many investors thought.
Mac retweeted
I am getting too many calls on this so I will cover in more detail Sunday on the weekly video. (youtube.com/@JordiVisserLabs)
but for now, here is a thread on what I will be showing as banks now run into a wall of future competition accelerating from the rise of AI native businesses and agentic commerce and tokenization.
🧵
Mac retweeted
According to public data, Firmus currently has only 42 to 46 megawatts (MW) actively operating across two data centers in Melbourne and Singapore, while claiming a "pipeline of 900 MW."
These deployments range from VMs to H200s.
In March, there was an unusual shipment of GB300s to Australia, from Nvidia to Firmus. It included 18.5K GB300s, or more than 40 MW if all of them were connected and operating.
So what happened to these GB300s since March? they collecting dust for more than six months, and counting.
It is a pattern we already know across neoclouds and hyperscalers.
If Firmus ever wants to get them plugged in, it needs this IPO. If Firmus wants to get any close its 900 MW fantasy, it needs this IPO.
While Jensen has dozens of neoclouds in his army, one soldier having trouble completing its training before the IPO may also affect the other soldiers.
Immediate impact? Probably not. Later impact? Well...
Firmus, congrats on getting your 18,500 GB300s.
Thanks to BlackRock & affiliated funds for supporting it via $10B in debt financing.
And thanks to Uncle Jensen for the support and for being an investor.
By the way, who is your client that’s going to get access to these? I assume Nvidia will broker a client soon.
And why is there no PR on that shipment?
I’m preparing an article on Firmus. It will be published exclusively on Substack, so make sure to subscribe.
Mac retweeted
Every day that Germany stays in the Euro, it writes a blank cheque to the high-debt South. The high-debt South - no surprise - cashes that cheque with great enthusiasm. Germany's political center is too "posh" to acknowledge this. But the AfD isn't...
robinjbrooks.substack.com/p/…
Mac retweeted
Critical materials will be one of the biggest bottlenecks of this decade
AI, data centers, defense, robotics and electrification will drive massive demand
How to gain exposure:
𝗖𝗢𝗣𝗣𝗘𝗥
Freeport-McMoRan | $FCX
BHP | $BHP
Rio Tinto | $RIO
Glencore | GLNCY
Southern Copper | $SCCO
Anglo American | NGLOY
First Quantum Minerals | FQVLF
Teck Resources | $TECK
Arizona Sonoran Copper | ASCUF
Ivanhoe Electric | $IE
Trilogy Metals | $TMQ
Solaris Resources | $SLSR
Atalaya Mining | ATYM.L
Ivanhoe Mines | IVN.TO
Hudbay Minerals | $HBM
Capstone Copper | CS.TO
Ero Copper | $ERO
Trekor Metals | $TGB
Lundin Mining | LUN.TO
Antofagasta | ANTO.L
NGEx Minerals | NGEX.TO
Marimaca Copper | MARI.TO
FireFly Metals | FFM.AX
Oroco Resource Corp | OCO.V
𝗚𝗥𝗔𝗣𝗛𝗜𝗧𝗘 𝗔𝗡𝗗 𝗔𝗡𝗢𝗗𝗘 𝗠𝗔𝗧𝗘𝗥𝗜𝗔𝗟𝗦
Syrah Resources | SYAAF
Westwater Resources | $WWR
NOVONIX | $NVX
Graphite One | GPHOF
Nouveau Monde Graphite | $NMG
Northern Graphite | NGPHF
NextSource Materials | NEXT.TO
Talga Group | TLG.AX
Renascor Resources | RNU.AX
Sovereign Metals | SVM.AX
𝗚𝗔𝗟𝗟𝗜𝗨𝗠
Rio Tinto | $RIO
Alcoa | $AA
American Resources | $AREC
5N Plus | VNP.TO
𝗠𝗔𝗡𝗚𝗔𝗡𝗘𝗦𝗘
Element 25 | ELMTF
Electric Metals USA | EMUSF
Eramet | ERA.PA
Euro Manganese | EMN.V
Jupiter Mines | JMS.AX
South32 | S32.AX
𝗦𝗜𝗟𝗜𝗖𝗢𝗡 𝗠𝗘𝗧𝗔𝗟
Ferroglobe | $GSM
Elkem | ELK.OL
𝗥𝗔𝗥𝗘 𝗘𝗔𝗥𝗧𝗛𝗦, 𝗦𝗘𝗣𝗔𝗥𝗔𝗧𝗜𝗢𝗡 𝗔𝗡𝗗 𝗠𝗔𝗚𝗡𝗘𝗧𝗦
MP Materials | $MP
Lynas Rare Earths | LYSCF
Neo Performance Materials | NEO.TO
Energy Fuels | $UUUU
Ucore Rare Metals | UURAF
Texas Mineral Resources | TMRC
American Rare Earths | ARRNF
Materion | $MTRN
Iluka Resources | ILU.AX
Arafura Rare Earths | ARU.AX
USA Rare Earth | $USAR
Ionic Rare Earths | IXRRF
Critical Metals Corp | $CRML
Northern Minerals | NOURF
Australian Rare Earths | AR3.AX
Appia Rare Earths & Uranium | APAAF
Mkango Resources | MKA.L
Hastings Technology Metals | HSRMF
Defense Metals | DFMTF
Rare Element Resources | REEMF
Australian Strategic Materials | ASM.AX
Brazilian Rare Earths | BRELY
Aclara Resources | ARA.TO
Rainbow Rare Earths | RBW.L
Lindian Resources | LIN.AX
Viridis Mining | VMM.AX
Pensana | PRE.L
𝗡𝗨𝗖𝗟𝗘𝗔𝗥 𝗙𝗨𝗘𝗟
Centrus Energy | $LEU
Solstice Advanced Materials | $SOLS
Cameco | $CCJ
Silex Systems | SLX.AX
ASP Isotopes | $ASPI
𝗔𝗡𝗧𝗜𝗠𝗢𝗡𝗬
United States Antimony | $UAMY
Perpetua Resources | $PPTA
Larvotto Resources | LRV.AX
Alkane Resources | ALK.AX
AMG Critical Materials | AMG.AS
𝗧𝗨𝗡𝗚𝗦𝗧𝗘𝗡
Almonty Industries | $ALM
Guardian Metal Resources | $GMTL
EQ Resources | EQR.AX
Tungsten West | TUN.L
Fireweed Metals | FWZ.V
American Tungsten | TUNG.CN
Tungsten Mining | TGN.AX
Group 6 Metals | G6M.AX
𝗩𝗔𝗡𝗔𝗗𝗜𝗨𝗠
Largo | $LGO
AMG Critical Materials | AMG.AS
Australian Vanadium | AVL.AX
𝗡𝗜𝗢𝗕𝗜𝗨𝗠, 𝗦𝗖𝗔𝗡𝗗𝗜𝗨𝗠 𝗔𝗡𝗗 𝗧𝗜𝗧𝗔𝗡𝗜𝗨𝗠
NioCorp | $NB
IperionX | $IPX
Sovereign Metals | SVM.AX
𝗠𝗢𝗟𝗬𝗕𝗗𝗘𝗡𝗨𝗠
Freeport-McMoRan | $FCX
Southern Copper | $SCCO
Antofagasta | ANTO.L
𝗖𝗢𝗕𝗔𝗟𝗧
Glencore | GLNCY
Vale | $VALE
Sherritt International | S.TO
𝗚𝗘𝗥𝗠𝗔𝗡𝗜𝗨𝗠
Teck Resources | $TECK
5N Plus | VNP.TO
Umicore | UMI.BR
𝗧𝗘𝗟𝗟𝗨𝗥𝗜𝗨𝗠
5N Plus | VNP.TO
Aurubis | NDA.DE
Boliden | BOL.ST
Mac retweeted
You live on an island…
It’s being done on purpose, against your will. At what point do you overthrow the government.
Mac retweeted
JPMorgan lays out the investing playbook for 3 midterm-election scenarios
- Markets tend to hate the uncertainty that comes with a general #election.
- Partisan gridlock would likely be the best case scenario for Wall Street, JPMorgan says.
- The impact to the stock market will be "more nuanced" than in previous elections.
Scenario 1: Gridlock
A continuation of the status quo tends to be a benign outcome for #investors.
The possibility of a divided house or senate would make it extremely difficult for the White House to pass most legislation. That's good news for anyone worried about excessive government spending, stricter regulation, or sharp #tax increases
"Congressional gridlock has been associated with positive S&P 500 returns since 1950, whether on an election date basis (+21% gridlock vs. +18% Single Party Control over 2-year Congressional term) or start date of the new Congress (+25% Gridlock vs. +18% Single Party Control," Lakos-Bujas noted.
His team sees the most benefit for defense contractors, healthcare companies, and some tech stocks that aren't heavily exposed to the AI data center buildout, which may be stalled if Democrats take either branch.
Scenario 2: Blue Wave
Prediction markets are strongly favoring the possibility of a Democratic wave in November, with odds currently hovering at close to 88% on Polymarket, which defines a blue wave as #Democrats taking more than 218 seats in the House of Representatives and more than 49 seats in the Senate.
However, that doesn't necessarily mean a total policy reset, the bank said.
"Rather than enabling a broad Democratic agenda," Lakos-Bujas stated, "a Blue Wave would likely shift the policy landscape at the margin through funding negotiations, oversight and efforts to preserve or unwind existing policies."
That said, his team sees healthcare stocks benefitting, as a Democratic congress could reverse the Medicaid cuts contained in Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA). They also see a blue wave as a bullish indicator for the clean energy sector, specifically for renewable energy resources.
Scenario 3: Red Wall
Lakos-Bujas and his team see #Republicans holding on control of both chambers of #Congress as the most bullish scenario for tech stocks. The result would likely mean fewer obstacles for the data center buildout, a flashpoint of the election that many democratic candidates have campaigned against.
"If Republicans maintain control of Congress, that would likely provide the most supportive incremental federal policy backdrop for the AI/Infrastructure buildout through policy continuity, potential fiscal expansion, deregulation and faster federal permitting," he added.
However, they also see strong benefit for any companies that stand to gain from a looser regulatory environment. If Republicans maintain control, that should benefit sectors including traditional energy and nuclear power, financials, and defense, the analysts said.
