Bullpen.News From Edwin Dorsey
Get Daily Recap Feedback

Thursday, October 15, 2026

Back to today

Is The Market Turning The Page?

CoreWeave’s debt and equity price action is framed as a wake-up call for investors amid a broader market discussion.

CRWV $34B
WHAT ARE WE DOING? “Contrarians At The Gate” 45 clicks

From X

@kevin__mak

Kevin Mak on X

$ASTS So many questions about ASTS (please don't reply to unrelated threads to get my attention, just DM me). I have no position in the company. My comments from 3+ quarters ago is that I wanted to see "more metal in space". My concern from 5+ quarters ago was "how do they go from producing 1 satellite in 6 months, to 6 satellites per month, that's a really hard scaling problem". I think Starlink screwed up with their Swarm acquisition and trying to force that tech to work, it put a 18+ month delay on them. My hope was that ASTS would capitalize on that, and it generally appears that they've had scaling issues that prevented that from happening. That isn't really their fault, "space is hard" and "mass production is different from prototypes". I think money isn't a problem for them, they have so much cash (they were smart to take advantage of their high stock price). The problem is execution is hard even if you have lots of cash. Strategically they're in a good place, the MNO's definitely want/need them to work to compete w/ Starlink. But the MNO's are powerless, they're awful at execution (they're only good at increasing your monthly bill!). The BO failure was a really big problem. SpaceX (Starlink) had very little leverage on ASTS before. If they slowroll/deny F9 launches, they just push ASTS towards their competitor (BO). Two competitors (BO and ASTS) become stronger. But since BO was offline, it makes SpaceX the de facto monopolist to ASTS' launch. That gives them a ton of power in this situation and I imagine (but have no way to prove it), they would flex that competitive pressure on the company. That's not illegal anti-competitive behavior, that's just "pressure". It's a tricky set of problems that face the company and the stock price reflects that. I don't have a strong view in either direction of whether things get better or worse from here. But my initial hopes/thesis were steadily eroded by the execution issues (and valuation), hence my eventual exit from my long position. I don't think I'm saying anything thoughtful or what people don't already know/experience. But worth putting it out there because I've received _a lot_ of questions. Disclosure: No position in ASTS.
@ParadisLabs

Paradis on X

Personal dip buys from today: $AVGO, $MRVL, $KLAC $AVGO: - Feels like the market has overlooked Broadcom YTD. - I think they're still one of the best positioned in the networking theme thanks to exposure to many diverse areas - optical DSP, Tomahawk, Jericho. - Future growth should accelerate via Tomahawk 6/7 ramping in 2027, Tomahawk Ultra, optical DSPs. - Obviously there are risks with Broadcom but I ultimately see earnings upside = stock should re-rate (at some point lol). $MRVL: - Investor day last week basically confirmed that they're a scaleable AI infra name...not just custom silicon / DSP. - Feels like Marvell's opportunity is now much bigger than most people thought. - E.g. other than 800G/1.6T....NPO/CPO, and scale-out + up. - Still think it's early from them with many areas yet to ramp volumes e.g. 1.6T and NPO/CPO. Overall, feels like both Broadcom and Marvell are very well positioned. Broadcom keep adding XPU customers + extend those deals with hyperscalers. Marvell keep growing, very high torque right now IMO. $KLAC: - Down 42% in 3.5 months and haven't had a position before and wanted to take one lol - more so as a re-rating trade rather than a longer-term hold. - No real in depth thesis, more so a risk/reward play in the broader "AI quality" ecosystem I'm tracking. - Especially when compared against other semicaps like $LRCX / $AMAT that are well ahead in YTD %. Obviously these aren't your sexy names like $NBIS, $INTC or $BE - but I feel like I built my positions in these types of names earlier in the year (was a little late to the Intel party) and don't want my core portfolio to get overly concentrated. That said, I'm well aware that semis earnings are right around the corner and that many of these bottleneck type names have de-rated. But as of right now, I'm sitting slightly on the cautious side by not attempting to time bottoms here. Recent flow data has been tragic for semis, so would rather wait to see a few days of +ve net flows first to get some confidence that investor fatique isn't a permanent scar. There's only so much tolerance investors have for multiple >20% drawdowns in a matter of months.

Investor Letters

All letters

Constellation: Stars Aligning?

Constellation Brands trades near $127 at roughly 11x next-twelve-month EV/EBIT, with recent business results offsetting concerns over…

STZ $22B
TSOH Investment Research 25 clicks
IBIT · long

Ishares Bitcoin Trust Etf

IShares Bitcoin Trust ETF (IBIT) is presented as a high-conviction Bitcoin position with attractive risk-reward.

IBIT $173B
Value Investors Club 2 clicks

Canterra Minerals: Research Note

Canterra Minerals increased Lundberg indicated tonnage 55% to 26.1Mt, with 226.2Kt of contained copper equivalent, supporting a Buchans…

EQX $13B
Atrium Research - Equity Research 1 click

Kenorland Minerals: Research Flash

Franco-Nevada bought 10.0 million Kenorland shares, a 12.4% stake, for C$22.2 million in a secondary transaction that issued no new shares.

FNV $47B
Atrium Research - Equity Research 2 clicks

Is EDA Dead?

Synopsys and OpenAI will share revenue from GPT-Synopsys, an AI chip-design model built on Synopsys’ licensed EDA tools rather than…

SNPS $96B
Chipstrat

Publications we follow

Every publication on this site, hand-picked.

129 publications

Newsletters 107

YouTube 4

Blogs 17

Seeking Alpha 49 of 231

Nominate a publication

X accounts we follow

Every account on this site, hand-picked.

88 accounts
Nominate an account

Investor letters we follow

189 firms

Sectors

Ordered by how often our editor reaches for them.