Bullpen.News From Edwin Dorsey
Get Daily Recap Feedback

Friday, October 23, 2026

Back to today

From X

@StableBread

Fajasy on X

Founder and CEO Andrew Karos hasn’t reported a single sale of Boost Run $BRUN stock since the listing. He takes a $1.00/year salary, owns 44.6% of the shares, and controls 87% of the vote, so his pay comes almost entirely through the stock. Since my August update, the only open-market sales came from director Sean Goodrich, who holds his stake through Goodrich ILMJS LLC, an investor on Willow Lane’s side of the merger. Goodrich’s sales came after a forced warrant exercise. Once $BRUN closed at or above $18.00 on 20 of 30 trading days, Boost Run could redeem its warrants for $0.01 each, so after it called them on July 21, Goodrich paid $12.7M on August 19 to exercise his 1,101,986 warrants. He then sold 198,200 shares at $20.15 on August 27 and 500,000 at $14.00 on September 14 for $11.0M total, 86.8% of what the exercise cost him, and still holds 4,437,921 shares (8.2% of the Class A). So I don’t read the sales as a verdict on the business, since he sold about what the exercise cost him when he could have sold far more. Meanwhile, three executives have more stock coming. The compensation committee granted them 4.59M time-based restricted stock units (RSUs) on September 29, 5.5% of the shares outstanding. At the $16.65 grant-date price, the 4.59M RSUs are worth $76.4M, 42.5-45.0% of the $170-180M 2026 revenue estimate. Giving up 5.5% of the shares is expensive, but the grants give the CTO who runs all of $BRUN’s GPU deployments and the CFO who has to finance the GPUs a reason to stay through mid-2029. $BRUN still reports three material weaknesses, the most serious kind of gap in a company’s financial reporting controls. They’re in (1) IT general controls, (2) segregation of duties (keeping one person from handling a transaction end to end), and (3) the number of qualified accounting staff. $BRUN’s filing record hasn’t been clean either. Both 10-Qs came late, after notices of late filing on May 26 and August 14, and the original Q1 10-Q, filed June 1, called its disclosure controls effective until an amended Q1 10-Q on August 18 said they weren’t. I’m comfortable with the weaknesses for now, since (1) the S-4 (merger filing) disclosed all three before the merger, (2) the amendment didn’t change any reported numbers, and (3) $BRUN has hired a chief accounting officer, a COO, and a CIO to fix the gaps. But lenders, and any agency rating the parent-level debt $BRUN wants, will read the same filings.
@convequity

Convequity on X

WSJ’s “$750B Anthropic compute bill”, which includes deals still being negotiated, is overblown as a panic. It isn't $750B a year. It's spread over about 10 years. By year 5, the fixed compute bill is about $104B a year. The math, stress-tested: assume compute eats a deliberately punishing 56% of revenue (far above where a scaled AI lab should settle), still leaving a 20% operating margin after other costs of ~24%. $104B / 56% ≈ $186B revenue in year 5 $186B / ~$40B revenue per GW ≈ 4.6 GW required $186B is also only ~2.8x today's $67B run rate. That's ~23% growth a year for five years, far slower than Anthropic is growing now. Demand isn't the problem. On paper, 4.6 GW is well inside the ~13.8 GW Anthropic has already lined up according to our ABBX. And it mostly pays as capacity comes online. The catch: what if the GW roadmap doesn't fully materialise? Only ~1.9 GW is live today. Getting even 4.6 GW running on Earth means beating power shortages, slow permits and growing local opposition to data centres. So the real risk isn't demand, it's delivery. That's why $SPCX matters. If Starship makes orbital compute work, it sidesteps the grid, the permits and the politics. The tide lifts all boats, and Anthropic is one of the biggest.
@convequity 1 click

Convequity on X

Our AI Bubble Barometer (ABBX) says the hyperscaler complex is not yet in bubble territory. Across the hyperscalers and neo-clouds we track, enterprise value relative to the capital invested in the business has fallen from 7.67x at the 15 May 2026 series start to 6.12x at the 15 Oct 2026 close. Two-year forward returns on that capital were 3.07x the cost of capital in Q2'26, down from Q1'26. Still comfortably value-creating, but the direction is lower, which fits this stage of the cycle: data centres and chips go on the books immediately while the revenue they earn arrives later. Q3 2026 reporting starts with Meta ($META) on Wed 21 Oct after the close, with Alphabet, Microsoft and Amazon the following week. We will watch whether forward returns keep falling as the capital base grows ahead of revenue. Falling returns alongside rising valuation multiples would be our classic bubble signal.
@convequity 2 clicks

Convequity on X

$META's Muse download numbers measure Meta's distribution, which was never in doubt. What decides whether Muse is a business is what the agent completes for a user, and nothing reported this week measures that. Sensor Tower puts Muse among the fastest US app launches on record, with early retention above the average for rival AI apps, and says a large and rising share of Meta's own ad spend now goes to it. That ad spend likely explains much of the install curve, and Meta can run the same ads for any product it owns. 1. Tasks completed. Nothing Meta or Sensor Tower has reported says how many sessions end in a booking, a purchase or a message sent for the user. Those are what a user would pay for, and in our view they are also where a merchant fee could come from. 2. Where the revenue shows up first. In our view Muse's first financial effect is on the ad business Meta already runs. When shopping happens inside Muse, Meta sees the whole path from what a user wants to what they buy, which sharpens its ad targeting. If users start shopping in Muse, Meta can also sell sponsored placement in its answers. Further out, ads could become part of the conversation itself, something we suggested earlier for Meta AI and which applies even more to an agent like Muse. A user preparing for their first marathon with Muse could be offered trainers, energy gels and hydration products in a conversational manner as the plan takes shape, rather than seeing an ad placed beside it. We expect Muse to show up in ad pricing before it appears as a subscription or a take rate. 3. The sharing suspension. Meta paused conversation sharing after security researchers found shared chats could expose personal and business information. That suggests people are already giving Muse real work with real data and sharing it with colleagues. It also means workplace use will meet the data-handling limits that slowed enterprise use of consumer chatbots. A real catalyst for $META will be Meta disclosing how many tasks and transactions Muse completes, especially if the numbers are impressive.

Investor Letters

All letters

Capital Wars

CoreWeave’s $35 billion to $39 billion 2026 spending plan relies on debt as unsecured yields reach 15%, making its GPU cloud expansion a…

CRWV $34B
Net Interest 7 clicks

Putting bear cases to rest

Medpace authorized $1 billion of buybacks through 2028 after Q3 revenue rose 8.5% to $716 million; service revenue grew roughly 12% as…

MEDP $18B
Best Anchor Stocks 10 clicks
CLF · long

Cleveland-cliffs INC

Cleveland-Cliffs is pitched as a long on underappreciated earnings power, with more than 90% return potential over six to nine months.

CLF $7.8B
Value Investors Club

Publications we follow

Every publication on this site, hand-picked.

129 publications

Newsletters 109

YouTube 4

Blogs 15

Seeking Alpha 56 of 248

Nominate a publication

X accounts we follow

Every account on this site, hand-picked.

90 accounts
Nominate an account

Investor letters we follow

190 firms

Sectors

Ordered by how often our editor reaches for them.