Bullpen.News From Edwin Dorsey
Get Daily Recap Feedback

Monday, November 9, 2026

Back to the front page

STRL: 80 new electricians a week

Sterling’s $4.1 billion backlog faces Texas permitting risk after a governor proposed a moratorium, while Connexion, Capital Asset Planning and BQE Water present concentrated, cash-heavy…

STRL $7.6B
Trade Ideas Flow 1 click

From X

@gnoble79

George Noble on X

From my friend Mr. X: As Anthropic apparently starts their road show, which I would call “We Work Part Deux.” Remember, as I said before, We Work cut their valuation 3x, still couldn’t get it done, and then eventually ended up bankrupt. And in my view, We Work and Adam Neumann had better governance and were a better deal, for a variety of reasons. And that was before everything started coming undone and prior to policy heading in the wrong direction and prior to the head of the central bank of NVDA, who is also financing them, was caught canoodling with a Chinese spy. This is why it does not work. This is not .COM or railroads. The $ are being spend on an incredibly dis-economic technology that will decay as opposed to sticking around. This is rapidly depreciating immature broken software and compute that is the equivalent of UNIX, SPARC, and VAX or a Mainframe. Then, the more they are spending, the less they are getting. It is sort of like the impact of every incremental dollar of debt on GDP, very diminishing marginal returns. There is no scaling. If the underlying technology does the opposite of scaling, the business cannot scale. Said simply, cost per unit is going way up (Anthropic’s S-1 tells you this too), revenue per unit is plummeting. See this tweet and subtweet: [] More on Jensen the China lobbyist: [] ICYMI re my last: $NVDA @JG_Nuke @DougKass @edzitron @MacrostrategyP @GaryMarcus
@Fierce__beast

Fierce_beast on X

$life anyone long? seems like the incremental margins could rapidly decouple as business becomes more 3rd party. also wondering what their ultimate edge is. if they are just providing a technological convenience to insurance providers, seems like a weaker customer value prop. if they have some secret sauce for generating great insurance terms quickly, that would be a bit better. i don't know a lot about how it all works and the incentives they have vs incentives that insurers have but one thing for sure is that profits are on trend to grow much much slower than revenues and it's trading at a very high multiple. if anything goes wrong with rev, the stock could collapse. even in the last quarter they beat and raised and the stock went down. very interesting.
@StableBread

Fajasy on X

From $14.47/share, you’re risking a $4.66 loss (-32.2%) on Quantum $QMCO in my bear case for a $20.40 gain (+141.0%) in my bull case, before any fallout from the CFO firing, which none of the three cases counts. Here’s where $QMCO’s stock could be by mid-2027 in my bear, base, and bull cases. I value each case on FY2028 revenue (year ending March 2028), since the market will be pricing that year by then. Each case’s value is FY2028 revenue times the multiple, plus the $77.0M of cash, over 44.6M diluted shares (44.7M in the bull case). Bear case ($9.81, -32.2%) The bear case assumes $IBM’s drive supply stays flat, Toshiba’s added capacity ends the disk shortage that helped push customers toward tape, and the “temporary benefit from higher pricing” $QMCO got in the June quarter fades. That implies FY2028 revenue of $300M, 8.5% below the $328M annual run rate in September-quarter guidance, at 1.2x, the multiple at the $9.42 PIPE price, for a value of $9.81/share. Base case ($17.89, +23.6%) The base case assumes $IBM raises drive output gradually through 2027, letting $QMCO ship more of its backlog each quarter. That implies FY2028 revenue of $360M, 9.8% above the $328M run rate, at 2.0x, a discount to $HPE’s 2.3x TTM revenue (as of October 27) for $QMCO’s open material weaknesses, for a value of $17.89/share. I use $HPE rather than $IBM (4.2x), since most of $IBM’s revenue comes from software and consulting rather than hardware. Bull case ($34.87, +141.0%) The bull case assumes $IBM ramps drive output early in 2027, the backlog converts quickly, and more hyperscalers (the largest cloud and internet companies) buy $QMCO’s Scalar i7 tape library. For reference, CEO Hugues Meyrath said the i7 deal $QMCO won from a hyperscaler in Asia-Pacific in the June quarter was valued at “well over eight figures.” That implies FY2028 revenue of $400M, 22.0% above the $328M run rate, at 3.7x, the multiple at my August update, for a value of $34.87/share. Winning more hyperscalers would also make $QMCO even more dependent on a few customers. Its top five customers made up 27% of FY2026 revenue, up from 21% in FY2025, and one customer made up more than 10%, when none did in FY2025. But the takeaway is that even the bull case, with faster $IBM supply and August’s multiple, lands just 1.1% above the $34.50 peak.
@valuedontlie

Colin King on X

Ugly chart at $APTV Maybe one of my favorite setups right now despite "tough industry" dynamics... Lapping one-time VGNT spin costs so FCF should jump to $1B+ next year (on $8B market cap = 12.5% FCF yield) and committed to buyback stock with 100% of FCF through 2027 Assuming no operational/industry improvement, it's not hard to get $7-8 EPS by 2028 (vs. $5.70 in '26) As a bonus, this management team has done 2 spins in 10 years and wouldn't be surprised if they spin the (better) engineered components business
@convequity

Convequity on X

I think the Oracle credit story could look very different in 2028 and 2029 from what the market is pricing today. $ORCL has priced $10 billion of stock and $10 billion of bonds to fund its AI buildout. Management expects free cash flow to turn positive in the second half of fiscal 2028. The interesting part is how Oracle gets there. AI customers need the capacity, and those customers also have relationships with the suppliers building the infrastructure. Customer prepayments and supplier financing can move some of the funding further upstream rather than leaving Oracle to finance everything itself. I'd also watch whether support can extend further up the supply chain. The final cost of a data center is not the same as the underlying cost of the components, so there may be room for suppliers or their suppliers to provide credit backing with less exposure than the headline project value. The actual contracts and who bears losses matter here. Oracle's five-year CDS has been trading close to 300 basis points. I'm curious about the other side of that trade: who is underwriting the protection, and what happens if Oracle reaches positive free cash flow and the fear around AI infrastructure financing eases? Selling protection is still a risky bet. A premium can look attractive right up until the underlying credit deteriorates, and spreads can widen before the trade works. But if Oracle delivers the capacity and its customers pay for it, I think the picture in 2028–29 could be very different from today's gloomy consensus.

Investor Letters

All letters

Vicor Update, Part Four

Vicor’s Federal Circuit hearing put Foxconn’s disputed patent license under pressure, reinforcing its AI server royalty model and licensing…

VICR $6.8B
CV's Substack 2 clicks

NEW POSITION: Google LEAPS

Alphabet bought long-dated GOOGL calls after a 12.6% earnings drop, betting AI monetization and distribution overcome capex pressure and…

GOOGL $3.5T
Hated Moats 1 click

Floor & Decor 3Q26: Business Update

Floor & Decor’s 3Q26 sales rose 3% while comparable sales fell 1.4%; it cut 2027 openings to 10-15 as high mortgage rates pressure…

FND $5B
Speedwell Memos 1 click

Toll roads in the sky

Asia's elevator boom favors maintenance and modernization providers, with Otis deriving nearly 90% of operating profit from after-sales…

OTIS $30B
Asian Century Stocks 2 clicks

Publications we follow

Every publication on this site, hand-picked.

129 publications

Newsletters 109

YouTube 4

Blogs 15

Seeking Alpha 77 of 280

Nominate a publication

X accounts we follow

Every account on this site, hand-picked.

91 accounts
Nominate an account

Investor letters we follow

359 firms

Sectors

Ordered by how often our editor reaches for them.