Saturday, October 17, 2026

@BlueDuckCap Oct 14 5 clicks

BDC on X

It's been 189 days since @evanspiegel had a confirmed sale. The longest sales void ever, per what we can discern from filings. He's in a blackout window now. If the sales do not resume post Q3 window opening then that would seem bullish. We would love an insider buy, too. Evan buys stock here we would think $SNAP is +10% on that day. At least. Not advice. Just pointing out the cadence of form 4's and lack of historical insider buying.

@BrokenMoats Oct 14 3 clicks

Broken Moats on X

Quickly back to very attractive levels to put back on short exposure on the software sector after the manic move in Q3 and digestion in September before the sudden crash up in the past 10 days..... AI wins software is in trouble - faster disruption more competition, pricing pressure AI trade is over, software is going to catch down as the market will tank and this won't sit that out (the are not cheap) Disruption and pricing is the tailwind, now valuation is too. Rates don't hurt either as up until recently these were considered long duration assets Recent results were status quo for most (no real acceleration) and pitch AI cohort growth as growing xx% but its not uplifting the total growth they are just changing what they charge for to show the street what it wants to hear) -- that phase is over, valuations are in many cases at year and multi year highs. SBC still a problem. Now comes renewals in the back of this year and thats where the issues will start to emerge on retention and pricing. An thats day 1 they will snowball overtime for the vast majority of these companies. Plenty of names to choose from: $PAYC $DOCU $TEAM $DDOG $PCTY $GDDY $RNG

@stockgutter Oct 14 2 clicks

SG on X

I asked @grok to assess how the full results that $MRNA plans to release at ESMO that would strengthen or weaken the impression from top line results announced in August. The results are copied below. Seems reasonable to me at first glance (without having checked any of the data cited) -- anyone have a different view? ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Items that could weaken (or further strengthen) the positive view include: - Magnitude of benefit: Hazard ratios (HRs), confidence intervals, absolute risk reductions, and landmark rates (e.g., 1- or 2-year RFS/DMFS). The earlier Phase 2b KEYNOTE-942 showed an RFS HR of ~0.51 (~49% relative risk reduction) and a DMFS HR of ~0.41 at 5 years. A substantially weaker Phase 3 effect (for example, HR closer to 0.75–0.85 with modest absolute benefit) could make the result look less compelling given the complexity, cost, and personalized manufacturing of the therapy. A comparable or stronger effect would reinforce the topline. - Statistical robustness and maturity: Width of confidence intervals, exact p-values, number of events, and median follow-up duration. Narrow intervals and a solid number of events support reliability; wide intervals, low event counts, or very short follow-up at the interim analysis could raise questions about reproducibility or durability. Subgroup consistency: Results by stage (IIB/IIC vs. III vs. IV), age, BRAF status, PD-L1 expression, geography, or other factors. Benefit concentrated in higher-risk stages or selected subgroups would narrow the practical population and commercial opportunity relative to a broadly consistent effect. Durability (Kaplan–Meier curves): Early separation that later plateaus or converges would suggest limited long-term impact. Sustained separation would support durability. - Overall survival signal: Any immature OS HR, death counts, or curve separation. An adverse or flat trend (while not decisive this early) could temper enthusiasm pending mature data. - Safety, tolerability, and feasibility details: Grade ≥3 adverse events, serious AEs, immune-related AEs, discontinuations, quality-of-life/patient-reported outcomes, and any manufacturing metrics (production success rate, turnaround time, or treatment delays). Higher toxicity, discontinuations, or practical barriers could offset efficacy gains. The topline noted consistency with prior experience and no new signals, but granular rates matter. - Stronger, consistent, durable efficacy with manageable safety and feasible delivery would solidify the positive assessment, support regulatory filings, and underpin commercial expectations. Marginal magnitude, inconsistency across key subgroups, limited durability, or meaningful safety/feasibility issues would lead to a more cautious view of clinical utility and value, even though the trial formally met its endpoints.

@calvinblissett Oct 14 6 clicks

Calvin Blissett on X

@Asymmetric_Val Without taking a look at $COF 100%

@BrokenMoats Oct 14 6 clicks

Broken Moats on X

$BSP really have to question Gregg as the right to choice to lead Berkshire with this BSP investment. While it's meaningless in size to Berkshire, it's what it says about the investment process under Gregg and how they are underwriting managers. This does not strike me as a Buffet investment on any level. Something to watch as he continues to deploy capital....not sure how you get comfortable with an acquisition roll up of intangible assets, especially against the unknown of ai disruption. They should go back and study the intangible asset roll ups from the prior decade in the pharma space

@negligible_cap Oct 14 1 click

Negligible Capital on X

That outta help - $CRWV https://t.co/6eLabLzAH4

@AsifSuria Oct 14 1 click

Asif Suria on X

Bending Spoons now up 45% on this news. If you are thinking this can't possibly be real, then the source document is an exhibit filed with $BSP's 6-K today: https://t.co/9b6y1XLIb6

@leevalueroach Oct 14 2 clicks

Lee Roach on X

Went to my local GameStop $GME today. The manager said they have more pre-orders to Zelda: Ocarina of Time than they do for GTA 6. The pre-orders are so much they are going to have a midnight release which they haven't had in years. He also said they going to start rolling out card tournaments inside of the store.