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” 51 clicks

From X

@StableBread

Fajasy on X

Revenue at Nubeva Technologies $NBVAF (TSXV: $NBVA) has fallen 76% since 2023, but it still has ~4 years of cash. Since losing Kroll, its biggest customer, Nubeva’s revenue has dropped from its FY2023 high of $2.07M. Expenses fell 66% over the same period, from $4.03M to $1.36M. Nubeva booked $500,586 in FY2026, across three revenue lines: 1) Software licenses ($204,055, 41% of revenue): Attributed in the MD&A “primarily” to NuRR, its ransomware-recovery product. 2) Subscriptions ($90,819, 18%): NuRR, down from $113,356 in FY2025. The December 2025 interim MD&A blamed the decline on fewer customers renewing. 3) Support and maintenance ($205,712, 41%): The last TLS (web-traffic decryption) customer, paying under a source-code and distribution agreement Nubeva kept when it sold its TLS technology in March 2024. Just two customers made up 82% of FY2026 revenue (41% each). While the concentration risk exists, both customers have continued working with Nubeva. The TLS customer has been paying since before the March 2024 sale, and the license customer since FY2025. Nubeva ended FY2026 with $2,489,316 of cash and money-market funds and no debt beyond a $12,262 pandemic-era SBA loan. Cash fell $600,162 over the year, which means runway is ~4 years ($2,489,316 / $600,162) if nothing material changes. CEO Randy Chou didn’t expect Nubeva to burn cash in 2025. In a March 4, 2024 video posted the day the TLS sale closed, he said the sale would make Nubeva cash-flow positive for calendar 2024, with 2025 “targeted to be the same.” Instead, cash fell $457,706 in the 12 months to January 31, 2026, the closest reported period to calendar 2025 ($3,184,879 to $2,727,173). In other words, the TLS sale didn’t make Nubeva self-funding, so the ~4-year runway is how long Chou has to automate support or sell. Even if both top customers churned, cash would still cover ~2.5 years of operations. Nubeva hasn’t raised equity since a CAD$1.59M private placement in February 2022, and the last warrants expired in FY2025, so dilution has been minimal.
@StableBread

Fajasy on X

Half the gold, platinum, and palladium in ore from McCreedy West, the producing mine of Magna Mining $MGMNF (TSX: $NICU), goes to Franco-Nevada $FNV for $1,200 per gold-equivalent ounce, 29.0% of the average gold price in Q4 2025. Magna inherited the deal, a precious metals stream, when it bought McCreedy West from KGHM $KGHPF, the Polish copper giant. A stream is a deal where a financier pays a miner upfront for the right to buy part of its future metal at a discount to market. Magna’s stream gives Franco-Nevada 50% of the gold, platinum, and palladium in ore from McCreedy West and “certain areas” of Levack and Podolsky, until the deposits run out or 2048. Franco-Nevada pays 60% of the monthly average gold price per gold-equivalent ounce (platinum and palladium converted into gold) from McCreedy West, capped at $1,200/oz once gold tops $2,000. In Q2 2026, the stream cut net revenue by US$3.9M, so revenue would have been ~18% higher without the stream. CEO Jason Jessup called the stream “a bit of an overhang” on McCreedy West, and in April said its terms are “definitely open for discussion” with Franco-Nevada. The higher gold climbs, the more the stream costs Magna, and I wouldn’t count on Franco-Nevada softening the terms. Crean Hill, Magna’s permitted nickel mine, carries no Franco-Nevada stream, and Jessup says R2, the high-grade zone Magna found at its flagship Levack mine, has none either. At Q4 2025’s gold price, Magna kept 64.5% of the value of McCreedy West’s gold, platinum, and palladium (50% + 50% × 29.0%). That means a stream-free ounce from Crean Hill or R2 is worth 1.55x as much to Magna as one from McCreedy West (100% / 64.5%). The stream also covers two areas of Levack, including the Morrison deposit. Franco-Nevada’s filings set the price for its Sudbury streams at $400/oz, rising 1% a year from July 2011, and its later increases applied to McCreedy West only, so Levack’s price would’ve reached ~$460/oz by Q4 2025 ($400 × 1.01^14). So at Q4 2025’s gold price, Magna would keep 55.6% of the value of Levack’s streamed ounces (50% + 50% × ($460 / $4,141.90)), less than the 64.5% it kept at McCreedy West.
@convequity 3 clicks

Convequity on X

$NET's AI hosting is limited by the physics of its edge footprint and by the role of its products. Carrier-hotel sites built for fast network traffic are a different proposition from purpose-built AI datacenters. Cloudflare’s own engineering disclosures acknowledge power constraints, and management distinguishes its strategy from the hyperscalers’ GPU spending race. Our assessment starts with a two-H100-per-server edge configuration. H100 PCIe and NVL-class cards operate around 350–400 watts per GPU, versus up to 700 watts for H100 SXM. Hyperscalers commonly pack eight SXM GPUs into a machine and connect those machines into dense clusters. The distinction is power, cooling, memory bandwidth and GPU interconnects — not simply whether a model can run. The existing edge footprint cannot acquire hyperscaler-class cooling and power density through server upgrades. Dense, liquid-cooled Blackwell and Vera Rubin systems require a different infrastructure commitment. We see little chance that NET’s existing edge footprint becomes a competitive home for those dense clusters. For sustained, large-model inference, our assessment is that sparse edge GPUs cost more per token than dense AI clusters. Geographic proximity saves network transit time, but it does not guarantee a faster first token or a cheaper response. Greater compute capacity, faster interconnects and efficient batching can outweigh the edge’s network advantage. We expect heavy training, frontier-scale hosting and the most demanding next-generation inference to remain concentrated with hyperscalers. Workers AI’s progress with larger open models is real. Hosting those models does not establish an economic advantage over dense clusters. AI Gateway also lets customers route requests to external providers, matching the model and infrastructure to the task. Cloudflare can still win substantially. More agents mean more requests to secure, more Workers executions, more orchestration and more demand for fine-grained access controls. Those workloads build on infrastructure and capabilities Cloudflare already has. On the SaaS Survival Scorecard, we score $NET at 2.5 for Model-Layer Leverage. That reflects its substantial work building an agent harness across inference, orchestration and execution, while stopping short of model post-training and reinforcement learning.

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 27 clicks
BLND · long

Blend Labs INC

Blend Labs (BLND) is presented as a long investment idea, with prior VIC writeups cited for business background.

BLND $217M
Value Investors Club 2 clicks

Lennar, Part One: The Story

Lennar grew from a Miami builder into one of America’s two largest homebuilders, controlling land largely through options and land banks…

LEN $17B
Latticework by MOI Global 15 clicks

Publications we follow

Every publication on this site, hand-picked.

129 publications

Newsletters 107

YouTube 4

Blogs 17

Seeking Alpha 52 of 238

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.