Wednesday, November 11, 2026

@calvinblissett Nov 6 1 click

Calvin Blissett on X

Great question. My short answer is that CareCloud ($CCLD) sells an outcome and selling that outcome requires trust and experience: getting doctors paid. Commoditizing AI makes that cheaper for CareCloud to deliver, not easier for someone else to copy. I also think they are very well positioned to deliver AI and keep reaping its benefits an they alluded to as much on the Q3 call. RCM is the bloodflow of a medical practice. It’s how the practice gets paid, and nobody experiments with their cash flow to save a few dollars on a cheaper AI tool, especially when small practices are hesitant to adopt AI to begin with. One missed month of collections can sink a small practice, so trust and a track record matter more than the newest model. Practices sign multi-year contracts, and a CareCloud rep told me the most common objection he hears is that prospects are “locked in a contract” with someone else. The stickiness that keeps practices from leaving their current vendor works for CareCloud once it has them. Hospitals are stickier still: the rep put hospital sales cycles at 1–3 years. The data from doing the work is part of the moat and not replicable at least quickly. They process claims for thousands of practices. On the Q3 call, management said denial rates fell from about 8% to under 4% in a year, against the 6–8% the large RCM firms publish and the 7–8% benchmark for physician practices. Zero-touch claim processing rose from 74% to 84%. A startup can buy the same model. It can’t buy the claims history, the payer-specific rules or the people who handle the exceptions that lead to Carecloud being MUCH better than industry benchmarks Cheaper AI widens their cost advantage. They already run a large team in Pakistan at a fraction of US labor cost, and AI is now cutting manual claim touches by 44%. In the CEO’s words: “Our team now handles more volume with the same headcount.” It shows in the margins. Revenue minus direct operating costs went from 47.8% to 50.5% of revenue, and adjusted EBITDA margin hit 29%, against about 13% in 2023. When AI gets cheaper for everyone, the operator with the most volume to run it on wins the most. It’s like Walmart with barcode scanners: everyone could buy one, but Walmart got the most out of it. They also said software development is a growth engine (I plan on asking about economics which they said were good and given their track record I believe), my take is this is a way for them to utilize that cost advantage and monetize that while it is still very potent relative to the industry. What is a risk here is the Warren Buffett tiptoes at the parade analogy and the Charlie Munger distinguish when the economics stick to your ribs versus just go all to the customer, I think that is a real risk but over a time frame long enough that in today's price it isn't super concerning. Follow up to above: RCM is usually priced as a percentage of what the practice collects (a royalty like what Bill Ackman loves as mentioned recently in his Oct 26 Equity Mates interview which I enjoyed:). When AI cuts denials from about 8% to under 4% (Q3 call), the practice collects more, and CareCloud’s fee rises with it. The client is better off and so is CareCloud. This is Charlie Munger's win-win business model (more data in writeup on this), what lead him to $COST and away from Valeant and $CACC. The core moat is the relationships and the volume of work that already exists. At about 5x EBITDA (see writeup for what peers trade at in TRANSACTIONS (13.6x for one set and 18x for another), the market is pricing CareCloud as an AI loser when it’s one of the bigger beneficiaries IN MY OPINION

@kab604 Nov 6 2 clicks

kab60 on X

$EPAM Seems like buying consultants was the real play! Should've rebranded as 'forward deployeed engineers' ofc.

@aleabitoreddit Nov 6

Serenity on X

Everyone’s a long term investor for 2027, 2028, or 2029 onward Until their portfolio experiences volatility months in. I still think: - $RKLB could end up the next $SPCX - $NBIS has the potential to be the next hyperscaler - $SIVE has moonshot potential to be the next $LITE - 1-3x P/E memory companies and $AXTI substrate bottlenecks are more durable than markets think And that it’s stupid to sell single digit fwd P/E AI companies or promising longs. And rotate that into 5% growth towel resellers at 47x P/E. Or 180x cyber companies, just because they’re going up. I’ve seen $AMD go from the $3 valley of doom to $400 as people thought it could be the next $INTC / $NVDA. And been through the Bitcoin $1000 -> $18,000 -> $3000 -> $100,000 cycle. Not advice on how to position or trade, but anyone on extreme leverage during those times got wiped out. While the underlying assets sharply recovered later. I do think AI, Space, and Physical AI are the future. So, I’m remaining long, and using this time to maximize exposure to the winners

@majgeoinvesting Nov 6 3 clicks

Maj Soueidan on X

Interesting growth for $DIOD vs valuation. Stock is down to $68 & 13x P/E on 2027 from $113. Looks good on paper, but never easy to pull the trigger. Being a Monday morning quarterback is so much easier.😂

@aleabitoreddit Nov 6 1 click

Serenity on X

@Jsjsjsjd88 $IREN 90% GPU capex prepayment on a 5Y contract is exceptionally bullish and surprising to say the least... Especially given market concerns over Neocloud financing.

@aleabitoreddit Nov 6 2 clicks

Serenity on X

$AAOI earnings: - $1B-$1.5B LTA disclosed with a hyperscaler customer - 2nd LTA coming soon, worth 5x+ more (implying $5B-$7.5B), in its final stages. This LTA explicitly includes lasers, very material for AOI that they're moving to supplying merchant lasers. - "The demand is exceptional, unprecedented. I do not know what kind of superlatives to use to describe the amount of demand that we are seeing out there in the industry" Yeah this commentary doesn't sound like any optical demand would slowed down if it's "exceptional + unprecedented" - Rejected hyperscaler slowdowns from political changes with little effect. - AOI Can only meet 80% of demand, in case there's a kind of reduction, the demand would be bigger than AOI future capacity - Moving toward other financing methods than ATMs (thank god), US bank loans similar to what $NBIS is doing, I'd argue is positive, given FCF coming in later. - Delay in meeting capacity projections into H1 2027. $471m/month targets pushed back into H2 2027, due to electrical procurement and construction logistics, which existed before Texas governor changed. This part is negative part of the earnings call. To qualify this, I don't quite think hyperscalers would sign a $5-$7.5B LTA if they didn't think AOI couldn't deliver. - Near term Q4 guidance cut was DSP availability. AOI revised near term projections down slightly to $385M and $420M in revenue. Said DSP supply would ease early 2027 and that they're qualifying more suppliers. - Gave hiked H2 2027 capacity projections from their expansion, near term revision downward. - 4 to 5 ongoing UHP laser eval/quals for CPO UHP laser segment alone would far outweigh their $3.8B MC, especially if you're executing on multi billion dollar contracts with 60%+ gross margin laseres. TLDR: - Long term visibility improved a lot, with est. $6-$9B cumulative LTA contracts coming soon. - Shift toward supplying CPO lasers merchant is fundamentally material vs. just transceivers, and what I wanted to hear - Capacity guidance hiked into H2 2027, near term delays from electrical/DSP related procurement + installation. I still think we're reached peak fear levels, but wouldn't dismiss disappointing short term procurement delays + Q4 DSP bottlenecks. AOI likely signing an additional +$5-$7.5B in likely hyperscaler LTAs and entering merchant UHP CPO market dominanted by $LITE + $COHR. Factored in with the valuation drop has made medium-long term opportunities very compelling.