New Ask Claude or ChatGPT about any stock, using Bullpen. Bullpen in Claude or ChatGPT. 7 days free
Bullpen.News From Edwin Dorsey
Get Daily Recap Feedback

Sunday, November 15, 2026

Back to the front page

From X

@aleabitoreddit

Serenity on X

My thesis is very narrow. It's also no longer speculation when it shows up in reported earnings. HBM is a very large component cost in an AI server and not what I'm arguing. There's also many bottlenecks outside of memory. An obvious example is $AXTI InP substrates, where not securing enough capacity (where cost is in hundreds of millions) would trigger ceilings to competitor optical programs. And we'd likely see accelerated procurement patterns into 2027 where capacity is hard to scale.
@StableBread

Fajasy on X

Where tf did all those crap accounts and "analysts" who pitched buying $CCXI (now $AGLT), pumpers, and degens go? I thought I was regarded for not buying the only humanoid listed company in the U.S!!! ... At least according the 4-5 accounts that blocked me for calling out their sh*t DD or simply disagreeing w/their thesis. Thought it was supposed to run up 500% post SPAC like FinTwit claimed??! Thought I was completely missing the point?? "99% of households haven't heard of the stock. Imagine when they do." That was another one of the "arguments" I heard quite often. 😅 Even offered my full deep dive for completely free to read. 🤷‍♂️
@ACapitalLP 1 click

A Capital on X

On a serious note, $CODI is one of the more glaring mispricings I’ve ever seen. People can argue whether NAV is $25 or $40/share, but I’m convinced that if you liquidated the entire company tomorrow, the assets would be worth at least 2x where the stock trades today. So why does this divergence exist? And more importantly, what closes the gap? Asset sales, replacing management, simplifying the structure, eliminating the governance discount? You don’t even need the stock to trade at 100% of NAV. What gets it to 80%? And at $12/share, how much downside are you really underwriting relative to the potential upside? That’s the asymmetry that interests me. I just don’t think there’s enough eyeballs on this given the size…
@StableBread

Fajasy on X

FORT Robotics, the robot-safety maker going public through the SPAC Newbury Street II $NTWO, grew revenue 53% in the first nine months of 2026 and still ended September with $1.7M of cash. The S-4 (merger filing) out November 13 says FORT's losses and low cash "initially raised substantial doubt" about the company staying in business for the next year. Management says the doubt is gone now that existing investors committed $10.0M of new SAFEs from October 21 to November 6, and FORT drew $1.5M more on its bank loans. Operating expenses grew faster than sales, mostly from hiring and from preparing to go public. After holders redeemed 82% of the public shares on October 28, the S-4 estimates $36.0-54.2M of cash at closing after costs, including the $10.0M of SAFEs. The August investor deck showed $181.8M to FORT after costs, with no redemptions. Estimated deal costs barely moved, from $19.0M in the deck to $17.8M in the S-4, so the deal spends $0.33-0.49 on costs for every $1 FORT keeps. The price stayed the same: FORT's holders still get 50.0M shares and options at $10.00 each ($500M). Newbury's board approved the $500M price without a fairness opinion (an outside adviser's view that the price is fair), and the S-4 says the board "did not receive any financial projections of Fort Robotics." At $10.89/share, the combined company's EV is ~$582M whether or not more holders redeem, or 36.7x FORT's $15.9M of TTM revenue. At the 7.5-11.2x sales multiples I used in my September 16 deep dive, FORT needs $52-78M of revenue to justify ~$582M, 3.3-4.9x its TTM revenue. In my November 8 update, I said I'd wait for the S-4 to show what the cash would fund before considering $FROB (the post-merger ticker). FORT CEO Samuel Reeves pitched the deal's cash on the August 18 investor call for product development, a bigger sales push, and acquisitions. At $36.0-54.2M, the cash looks more like runway: ~3.6-5.5 years at the ~$9.9M/year FORT burned through September.

Investor Letters

All letters

Q3 Earnings Updates

Q3 updates cover Crocs, Entravision and Fiserv beats, coal and oil weakness, and Xerox’s sharp decline, testing the underlying cases for…

CROX $7.5BEVC $874M
Hidden Rock Capital's Newsletter 3 clicks

The Spy Who Shagged The Market

Nvidia’s leadership scandal puts its AI-market role under scrutiny, with comparisons to AIG’s pre-GFC liquidity influence.

AIG $43B
WHAT ARE WE DOING? “Contrarians At The Gate” 4 clicks

Is Nebius Fucked?

Nebius’ Q3 beat relied on $325 million of one-off partnership fees as it raised 2027 CapEx to $40–45 billion and may need $6–11 billion of…

NBIS $32B
Daniel Romero 6 clicks
EVC · long

Entravision Communications

Entravision Communications, up fourfold year to date, is pitched as an undervalued growth business emerging from a troubled parent…

EVC $874M
Value Investors Club

Vicor Update, Part Two

Vicor uses ITC exclusion-order cases to license power-module patents, with published royalty multipliers rising from 1.0x before filing to…

VICR $7.3B
CV's Substack 5 clicks

Expert Call | Nebius

Nebius’s 1 GW annual active-capacity target from 2027 is realistic, according to a former product manager, with greenfield data centers…

NBIS $32B
P Equity Research 5 clicks

Publications we follow

Every publication on this site, hand-picked.

130 publications

Newsletters 110

YouTube 4

Blogs 15

Seeking Alpha 88 of 295

Nominate a publication

X accounts we follow

Every account on this site, hand-picked.

91 accounts
Nominate an account

Investor letters we follow

376 firms

Sectors

Ordered by how often our editor reaches for them.