Bullpen.News From Edwin Dorsey
Get Daily Recap Feedback

Friday, October 2, 2026

Back to today

From X

@RagingVentures

Raging Capital Ventures on X

Some thoughts of mine on Archegos from May 2021 (below). Was Leopold using swaps? The value of Situational’s reported Q1 13F holdings pale in comparison to some of the exposure numbers being mentioned today, even adjusting for appreciation. I would observe that once Archegos blew up at the end of March 2021, many previously impossible shorts (names like $TDOC and $TRUP come to mind) became much easier to navigate and ultimately collapsed… ****** PEELING BACK THE ARCHEGOS ONION The implosion of Archegos is a very important market development and I hope regulators peel back the onion to truly understand what occurred. Archegos owned massive swap positions in companies like ViacomCBS (VIAC), Discovery Communications (DISCA), Tencent Music (TME), and GSX Techedu (GSX), in some cases controlling 20-50% of their tradeable float. Swap ISDA agreements typically limit aggregate ownership in a single company to 4-9%. Archegos appears to have aggressively violated these limits and/or the prime brokers looked the other way, enabling the firm to corner numerous large stocks in the U.S. equity markets. Notably, Archegos owned perhaps 50% of the float of a reputed fraud, GSX. How long has Archegos’ Bill Hwang been cornering stocks like this? He is rumored to have turned $200 mm into $5 b over the past six years (and may have briefly tripled that amount to $15 b during early 2021). What other short squeezes did he orchestrate in recent years? Are other funds using similar strategies as Archegos, and were there wolf packs of funds that Archegos was communicating with on these squeezes? My hunch is that Hwang and his ilk have been cornering stocks for years, with the typical exit plan being the sale of his positions to passive indexes who are perversely designed to buy more of a stock the higher the price goes. This underscores a major issue with passive investing. Archegos’ machinations also created tremendous pain for short selling hedge funds, which provide a valuable ballast for the entire stock market. Furthermore, if you peel back the onion enough, I think you will find an Archegos (or a similar fund) connection to Tesla (TSLA), which was squeezed multiple times until it was added to the S&P 500. Is it possible that Elon Musk, who regularly attacked the shorts, and who in 2018 was making unusual pre-market trades in his own stock at prices well above the prevailing market price, was somehow connected to this action?
@ActAccordingly 2 clicks

PAA Research on X

A name for @dirtcheapstocks and @dirtcheapbanks... $ETD. $600 mkt cap, $133MM in cash, no debt. Generated $40MM+ in cash flow last year. They also have extensive real estate holdings (unencumbered) which could be worth $175-$275MM. They pay a regular dividend of $0.39/quarter which is about a 7.0% yield. For the past 6-years they've used any excess FCF to pay special dividends to shareholders. The stock trades at 1.5x book (which is clearly understated). Seems like someone should buy this biz.
@convequity

Convequity on X

$TSEM + $SOI: positioned on both sides of the biggest shift in AI datacenter interconnect — and Google's new TPUv8i just supercharged the story. Leg 1 — Smarter optics, much bigger chips. Next-gen optical links ("coherent-lite") encode data far more densely than today's IMDD links. But the sophistication has a physical cost: the photonic chip needs roughly 2–2.5x more silicon area per port, because it packs in multiple modulators, splitters, and detectors where today's simpler links need one of each. Factor in that bigger dies yield worse, and you need ~3–4x the wafer starts per port. More area × more volume × worse yield = several-fold growth in SiPh wafer demand over the cycle. Leg 2 — The switch itself goes photonic. TPUv8i connects its chips through an optical circuit switch (OCS) built from silicon photonics — a genuinely new thing. $GOOGL's old scale-out OCS used MEMS mirrors: zero SiPh content. The new one puts a very large photonic die (300–450mm², heading toward 500–800mm² — near the reticle limit) in every pod. That's a brand-new ~10–20% layer of demand on top of the transceiver story, and it scales faster than linearly as switch radix grows from 64×64 to 128×128. The elegant part: Leg 2 forces Leg 1. The optical switch loses 5–10dB of light — 70–90% of the signal is gone by the time it exits. Today's IMDD transceivers can't read a signal that weak; coherent ones can. So every transceiver plugged into the switch fabric has no choice but to go coherent — and coherent means the 2–2.5x bigger chips from Leg 1. Google's switch decision doesn't just create its own SiPh demand; it automatically triggers the transceiver upgrade too. Tower has manufacturing flows for both legs: high-speed modulator + Ge flows for transceiver PICs, AND mature passive flows for the huge fabric dies. Soitec supplies the photonics-SOI wafers upstream either way — it wins regardless of which foundry takes the socket. One more kicker: Celero, the Alphabet-backed startup tipped for Google's coherent DSP socket, has no fab of its own — its companion photonic chip has to land somewhere, and an open specialty foundry is the obvious somewhere. Risks: coherent modulators migrating to InP/TFLN would leak the PIC leg out of silicon photonics; Marvell verticalizing into its own photonics partially bypasses the open-foundry path.

Investor Letters

All letters

Nike, Part One: The Story

Nike grew from a $1,000 shoe-distribution venture in 1964 into the largest sports brand, using athlete endorsements, product innovation and…

NKE $51B
Latticework by MOI Global 3 clicks

Publications we follow

Every publication on this site, hand-picked.

109 publications

Newsletters 92

YouTube 4

Blogs 12

Seeking Alpha 44 of 215

Nominate a publication

X accounts we follow

Every account on this site, hand-picked.

73 accounts
Nominate an account

Investor letters we follow

189 firms

Sectors

Ordered by how often our editor reaches for them.