Tuesday, November 3, 2026

@DOMOCAPITAL Oct 19 4 clicks

DOMO Capital Management, LLC on X

I think we can assume that $PESI lost money in Q3, but the most important indicator for me is the backlogs. If they can show a huge increase in backlogs that should indicate that they can be cash flow positive in Q4 and beyond. Stock will go $20+ if market takes the "equity raise" risk premium out - which it should - if management can give certainty on the cash flow front. Again, I think a focus on the backlogs would be the main indicator of this.

@kevin__mak Oct 19 2 clicks

Kevin Mak on X

$CMPS Update on Compass Pathways (1) We're currently waiting for the company to complete its rolling NDA (New Drug Application) submission to the FDA, expected this quarter. The FDA has already started reviewing portions of the application. Reminder that Compass has been granted both rolling review and a Commissioner’s National Priority Voucher, which targets a review period of roughly 1–2 months once the complete application is filed. That timeline isn't guaranteed, but this is one of the fastest review processes available. It doesn't guarantee approval either, but it clearly shows that the FDA is prioritizing getting this drug reviewed. (2) The company presented at the STAT Summit, and the CEO said they will “go slow before we go fast.” My guess is that's being interpreted in a slightly negative way, suggesting that the initial drug launch won't necessarily get quick traction. As an investor in the company, my first reaction is that I don't want to hear that. I want to hear that revenues are going to explode out of the gate. But just because I want to hear something doesn't make it true. Taking a step back, Compass has taken a deliberate approach to developing this drug and preparing for launch. The CEO's point was that bad early experiences for patients or providers could set back both Compass and the broader industry. Getting those first experiences right matters. I think calibrating expectations and not being overly promotional is a smart choice. That could mean a more measured initial revenue ramp, and I'm fine with that if it sets them up for sustained adoption. At the same time, the company has been preparing to scale. Its strategic collaborations span more than 1,000 sites, including Neuronetics/Greenbrook and other established treatment networks. There is already substantial infrastructure to build on. I think this is the correct approach. (3) The company has now explicitly communicated expected annualized drug pricing of $50k–$65k per patient, based on an average of roughly three doses per year. That implies approximately $17k–$22k per dose, before clinic administration and monitoring costs. The final launch price hasn't been announced, but management has given us a much clearer pricing framework. In terms of M&A, which isn't part of my base case, my guess is the best window is after the label is set. At that point, a potential buyer will know much more clearly what they're buying and how it can be commercialized. From a positioning perspective, I think completing the NDA submission could bring new investors into the stock. It removes another layer of timeline uncertainty and puts an FDA decision much more directly in view. My guess is that matters to investors who have been watching but haven't wanted to get involved yet. My long-term outlook on the stock is unchanged. I think they get a good label, and I think concerns about the length of clinic visits are overblown. The market is massively underserved, and Spravato (which I believe COMP360 will offer a more attractive alternative to) is already selling at roughly a $2.5B annualized rate. My PT remains $45, and my full write-up is below. https://t.co/rVZOU3yIz6 Disclosure: Creek Drive and its affiliated funds holds a positions in CMPS. Views expressed are current opinions for information 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.

@calvinblissett Oct 19

Calvin Blissett on X

$TREE https://t.co/JA8hmhxt9o https://t.co/mkhtebDjJd

@StableBread Oct 19 1 click

Fajasy on X

Just posted the $BRUN write-up here (you can read most of it for free): https://t.co/MkwtIqqVLX

@StableBread Oct 19 11 clicks

Fajasy on X

I first wrote up an AI data center company that rents out $NVDA GPUs to AI startup companies on April 15, 2026, when it still traded as a SPAC at $10.70/share, just above its ~$10.60 trust value. The merger was a success, and the stock peaked at $39.20/share on June 1st. Now it trades below its SPAC price. That company is Boost Run $BRUN, which has fallen to $8.89/share, down 77.3% from its peak, even after it announced its largest disclosed contract on October 6 (worth $525.6M). The three larger listed GPU clouds have fallen from their 2026 highs as well, through the October 16 close: → CoreWeave $CRWV: Down 55.5% to $61.39/share. → $IREN: Down 60.2% to $26.99/share. → Nebius $NBIS: Down 42.3% to $165.47/share. So $BRUN fell with the group, but further than all three. I’d blame the drop from $39.20 on two causes that have nothing to do with $BRUN’s core operations: (1) higher rates and borrowing costs, and (2) $BRUN’s float growing ~3.1x, which was expected once its lockup ended and its warrants were called. Yet the business carries less risk than it did as a SPAC: → Contracts: $1.61B with disclosed terms and TCV over $2.6B, including $1.43B signed since my April write-up. → Customers: Thinking Machines Lab (the AI startup founded by former OpenAI CTO Mira Murati) and Cohere make up 61.9% of the $1.61B on three- to five-year terms, after three customers made up 75.9% of 2025 revenue, led by RunPod, a GPU cloud platform, at 44.5%. → Year-end target: If Thinking Machines’ GPUs are fully running by December 31 and the June order starts on November 30, the five disclosed contracts running by year-end cover $300.6M (75.1%) of the $400M ARR target. → Merger: Closed on May 8, 2026, with zero redemptions. → Balance sheet: The merger proceeds paid off its short-term bridge loans, the going-concern language is gone, and pro forma cash is $191.8M, up from the $108M I used in my June 3 update, right after the merger. But $BRUN still has to get the GPUs bought, financed, and running by December 31: → To reach the $1.0-1.2B of GPU spending management expects for 2026, $BRUN has to deploy $663-863M of GPU servers in H2 2026, 2.3-3.0x its cash and contracted prepayments. → CFO Erik Guckel said on the Q2 call that $BRUN is working on new ways to finance the build, but I found no new facility, lender, or term sheet in its filings or press releases from August 14 to October 16. → $BRUN’s named customers are private AI startups without investment-grade ratings, so its contracts are harder to borrow against. → If lessors funded 70% of the H2 2026 build instead of 79.5% (as in H1 2026), $BRUN would need $199-259M of its own cash for the build, more than its $191.8M of pro forma cash. → Both 10-Qs came late, after notices of late filing on May 26 and August 14, and $BRUN still reports three material weaknesses, the most serious kind of gap in a company’s financial reporting controls. → Founder and CEO Andrew Karos controls 87% of the vote. At $8.89/share, $BRUN’s EV is $989.7M. That’s 2.5x its $400M target for year-end ARR, down from 5.4x at the $22.93 price in my August 16 update. At 2.5x, $BRUN trades below all three peers, including $IREN at 3.2x. So did the thesis break, or just the stock? That’s what I answer in my new ~5k-word update on $BRUN, including my bear, base, and bull cases (Excel model included).

@ToddWenning Oct 19 13 clicks

Todd Wenning on X

One of the big knocks on the thesis is that $HD or $LOW would copy whatever they're doing. HD had the chance back in the mid-2000s when Howden Millwork was forced to retreat, but didn't. $FND also built a multi-billion enterprise under their noses. The key is to focus on a niche and then be really good at that niche, which I think HWDN can do.

@BlueDuckCap Oct 19 2 clicks

BDC on X

Don't see on Bloomberg yet but looks like billionaire health care investor Jorey Chernett has taken his stake in $XGN over 10%. Love the name also. Not advice. https://t.co/L6u1mMsKJ8

@convequity Oct 19

Convequity on X

We think the foundry business at Intel ($INTC) may be closer than the market assumes. In our view, the key question is whether outside customers can design and produce chips with Intel. That is hard because Intel built its design rules, software and processes for its own teams. Two developments help. 1) Intel's 12nm partnership with $UMC brings experience serving external customers and a more customer-friendly design kit. 2) Musk has said Terafab plans to use Intel's 14A process, with Tesla and SpaceX building and running the fabs themselves. We see that as an important external test of 14A. Intel still has to prove yields, volume and schedules, and Terafab's commercial terms remain unclear. We continue to hold our Intel position and remain bullish, but not enough to add to it for now.