Bullpen.News From Edwin Dorsey
Get Daily Recap Feedback

Saturday, October 31, 2026

Back to today

When the liquidity does not add up

Arbor Realty Trust’s dividend suspension is presented as creating $60 million of liquidity, raising questions about its ability to meet 2027 debt maturities.

ABR $2.2B
John Hempton's Newsletter 3 clicks

From X

@BrokenMoats 1 click

Broken Moats on X

$SNOW conference call is the bear case for application software companies. Their data infrastructure combined with coco and cowork on top increasingly makes SNOW a key player in data migrations, and data consolidation for their customers and a key hub to switch between models means SNOW has a seat at the table to be one of the most important and internal pieces of an AI stack....and as they become the permissions data holder with governance and api/mpc to internal and external partners, they can actually become the system of record across applications. This would allow you to use tools like cocoa inside to contextualize in human language what you want built, or even what data/answers you want and how you want that visualized.... Compare this to a Salesforce that is essentially becoming a database company silo to their specific domain by opening up their data to Claude to be the work engine. Eventually companies will increasingly want to stop interfacing with multiple applications to query and want to UI and query across a singular interface (originally thought to be an LLM like Claude, but with specific training and different inference costs / intelligence across models its more like the player presiding over the biggest pool of company data (snowflake, databricks) could become that central payer - less model lock, more flexibly, and central access point for models, data, queries and ui across functions. May not relegate a salesforce obsolete but significantly destroys their value when people access from Snow or even from an LLM like Claude were they lose the ui interface, and behavioral association and slight shared/learned network effects and become a database. Increases switching costs overtime and certainly destroys pricing (agent force consumption model is a step in the modern pricing setup, but start based models are dead, its not an if for most applications without highly defensible and proprietary data) $PEGA, $APPN, $PATH, $CRM, $PAYC are first pass through som of the more exposed names
@ActAccordingly 1 click

PAA Research on X

$ATD (think Circle K) said on its earnings call that its revenues from energy drinks are now twice that of carbonated sodas (albeit at lower margin). $ATD comped 1.7% on SSS of which a big portion was driven by double digit growth in energy drinks. I look at the charts of $CELH and $MNST and wonder how long the c-store players can count on continued growth in this category. It's energy drinks and Zyn... $CASY $MUSA
@kevin__mak

Kevin Mak on X

I think this is a good analysis and I'm long $QURE, but I want to flag something about this style of argument because it shows up across a lot of stocks. The common version is "the fundamentals are much better than they were x years ago, but the market cap is the same, so it must be underpriced." That doesn't follow. A disconnect like that means one of the two prices was wrong. It could be too cheap now, or it could have been too expensive before. All you actually know is that the market was probably wrong once. (To credit: @ClearPath100 doesn't explicitly say it's underpriced here.) That said, I still think these situations are worth finding. I generally assume the market is more often right than wrong, so a stock that moves with its fundamentals isn't very interesting. The disconnects are where the market might be wrong, and that's what we want. You just have to do the work to figure out which price was the wrong one. For QURE, I think the shorter comparison is more useful than the 5 year one. The stock was $70+ before the FDA denial that took it to $8. It's $48 today at a lower market cap than it was at $70. In between, the path to approval got better, not worse. The BLA is filed, the confirmatory study design is agreed, the timeline to commercialization is shorter, there's a year more of follow up data, and more cash on the balance sheet. Every risk that exists today also existed at $70. The biggest risk that did exist at $70, the FDA refusing the dataset, has already played out and been resolved. So which price was wrong? My guess is a lot of sharp people owned this at $70+, dumped it on the news, and never came back. I think they were right to sell back then. But if you were right to own it at $75 with more risks and a longer timeline, you should want to own it even more at $48 with fewer risks and a shorter one. Not buying it back isn't consistent with their own original view. I think the reason is simple. Losing 75% on a stock stings, and it's a lot easier to stay away than to admit the same thesis is back on the table at a better price. That's part of why we own it here. Disclosure: Creek Drive and its affiliated funds holds a long position in QURE. Views expressed are current opinions for informational educational only, subject to change and are not investment advice or a recommendation to buy or sell any security. Investing involves the risk of loss and past performance is not indicative of future performance. See the disclosures link in my bio for more important information.

Investor Letters

All letters

OSS Q3 FY12/26 Earnings Analysis

One Stop Systems grew Q3 continuing-operations revenue 36% to $12.6 million, raised FY2026 revenue guidance to $45 million, and used $11.8…

OSS $117M
Cestrian Capital Research 1 click
PSN · long

Parsons CORP

Parsons generates roughly half of its $6.4 billion revenue from Federal Solutions, serving defense and intelligence customers.

PSN $5.3B
Value Investors Club

The Data Center Bridge

Small- and mid-cap data center stocks trade as one despite sharply different funding bridges: 12 of 15 cover fixed costs on signed…

IREN $9.9BFRMI $1.3B
CV's Substack 16 clicks

Amkor Q3 FY12/26 Earnings Review

Amkor's Q3 sales were flat at $1.991 billion as computing and automotive/industrial growth offset a 27% communications decline; Q4 sales…

AMKR $8.8B
Cestrian Capital Research 4 clicks

Publications we follow

Every publication on this site, hand-picked.

129 publications

Newsletters 109

YouTube 4

Blogs 15

Seeking Alpha 74 of 275

Nominate a publication

X accounts we follow

Every account on this site, hand-picked.

91 accounts
Nominate an account

Investor letters we follow

339 firms

Sectors

Ordered by how often our editor reaches for them.