High Convexity

High is my first name and Convexity is my last name. $NUAI The next $CVNA story. Bought the dip on the 12/29/25 and 12/30/25 and never looked back.

[High Convexity @ConvexityStocks]

1/ $NUAI: NM lawsuit headline vs Texas TCDC catalyst. Market sold first, asked questions later. I’m staying focused on what matters: does this materially impair tenant signing + project financing?

[₿itcoin ₿utcher 🥩 🐑 🐷 @bitcoinbutcher1]

https://t.co/LraxfZUSGG

[David Senra @davidsenra]

Groq Founder @JonathanRoss321 explains why all the West Coast VCs missed on investing in Groq:

“Typical West Coast VCs are more like lemmings. Ttypical East Coast VCs all think that they're smarter than each other.”

“So when you try and raise from the West Coast, if one VC puts money in, all the others want to put money in.”

“In New York, one VC investing means nothing. They're going to run their own analysis. They do not care what other VCs are doing.”

“The flip of that is, if you're on the West Coast and one VC passes, they're going to go tell every other VC, and like lemmings, they're all going to pass as well.”

“All the VCs on the West Coast didn't want to invest in us. We had very few of the typical VCs invest in us at the end. We had a bunch of crossover funds from the East Coast investing.”

[High Convexity @ConvexityStocks]

@litigious_dulce @bitcoinbutcher1

[Dulce @litigious_dulce]

$IREN is doing what many of us criticized $MARA, $RIOT, and $CLSK of doing: giving enormous executive compensation that is not based on performance. Like @bitcoinbutcher1 , I find this recent development disappointing.

Perhaps this may backfire in the future, but I do encourage IREN investors to look closer at $NUAI. BTM is a real thing, and the C-suite is genuinely impressive (see Evan Pierce's and Jose Rodriguez's backgrounds on LinkedIn). It's also on sale after the major drop yesterday lol.

[New Era Energy & Digital, Inc. (Nasdaq: NUAI) @NUAI_IR]

$NUAI today announced a leadership transition to support the Company's next phase of execution and growth.

Charlie Nelson has been appointed Chairman and CEO. Ted Warner has been named President and CFO and appointed to the Board of Directors, and José Rodriguez has been appointed COO. Darin Rovell joins as Chief Accounting Officer.

E. Will Gray II will transition to President of the Permian, where he will continue supporting the Company's Permian Basin relationships and development initiatives.

Read more: https://t.co/puLCUbKpnt

[Evan @StockMKTNewz]

MICRON AND ANTHROPIC JUST ANNOUNCED A NEW AGREEMENT

Micron $MU and Anthropic just announced a new agreement that

"spans memory and storage AI architecture design, supply and demand, enterprise adoption of Claude across Micron and a strategic investment in Anthropic’s Series H funding round"

[Kash @KashRamki]

Thanks for hosting @bitcoinbutcher1! $NUAI today is valued a little over powered land value. The downside is protected. The upside is large and asymmetric.

[Dulce @litigious_dulce]

$NUAI — Second bite at the data-center-colocation trade
Who this is for: investors who traded the 2024–2025 public data-center cohort ($WULF, $APLD, $HUT, $CIFR, et al.) and already understand how these names re-rate on a first hyperscale lease. The argument below is simply that NUAI is the same setup, one stage earlier, into a demand backdrop that's now proven rather than speculative. The key points are:

· The high-conviction bets this cohort made on data center stocks in 2025 paid off massively, and they were placed when AI demand was far more speculative than it is now. Those names have since re-rated and the thesis is validated. NUAI is the chance to run the same playbook again — pre-lease, power-rich, hyperscaler in the room — except into a confirmed demand backdrop rather than a hoped-for one. The setup is clean and squarely inside a risk profile you already operate in.

· You don't need to redeploy out of the maturing names to capture the convexity here; a modest position can still be highly rewarding given the asymmetry. Small sizing is also better trade construction: it lets you dollar-cost-average through volatility, keeps dry powder for the July tape, and — underrated — keeps you emotionally detached enough to execute well when the chart is whipping around. Position size is risk management and behavioral management.

---------------------------------------------------
For investors who already own the operating cohort at valuations that arguably discount execution, New Era Energy & Digital offers exposure to the pre-contract phase of the same playbook. The relevant question isn't whether NUAI is "good" — it's whether the risk-adjusted payoff justifies a small, ring-fenced allocation. I think it does, with discipline around sizing and entry.

The setup. TCDC: ~650 MW gross secured in Ector County, TX, with 1+ GW potential. NUAI now holds 100% post the Sharon AI buyout. Per Northland ($11 PT), the site is in advanced commercial discussions with a top-four hyperscaler. The investable thesis therefore rests on the following considerations:

1. Migration to a fully islanded, behind-the-meter campus. BTM generation removes the ERCOT batch study, interconnection queue risk, ratepayer politics, and regulatory timeline — converting the dominant schedule risk into procurement/construction risk, which is more controllable. June 11 Odessa Development Corp commentary corroborated tenant urgency and the dedicated-generation path. In a market clearing on speed-to-power, this is the right architecture.

2. A credible Phase 1 power source. Northland's diligence ties Phase 1 (~207 MW) to Vistra/Luminant generation adjacent to CIFR's Odessa site, whose PPA rolls off ~July 2027 — synchronizing with NUAI's targeted delivery. Existing substation infrastructure underpins the "no significant electrical infrastructure required" claim.

3. Counterparty quality. Stream (Apollo-controlled, $40B) as developer/operator, Apollo the presumptive institutional equity arranging ~80% project debt, and Macquarie's $290M project facility. The JV was, per the analyst, hyperscaler-directed — a meaningful signal about deal seriousness.

4. Personnel as a stage-of-development tell. CDO Evan Pierce (5+ GW deployed; prior sole-BTM delivery to the same hyperscaler) and GC Michael Johnson (ex-CoreWeave, ex-Switch). Execution and transaction-closing hires, not narrative hires.

5. Legal overhang cleared. Agreement for full dismissal of the New Mexico action announced May 28 removes a discrete tail risk and unblocks legacy-asset monetization.

6. Catalyst path is time-boxed. The Macquarie facility requires lease execution by Oct 8, 2026; a ~14-month build for pre-YE27 energization implies a signature by early Q4. Lender covenant, tenant timeline, and PPA roll-off converge on the same window. You're not underwriting an open-ended story — there's a forcing function and a defined catalyst date.

7. Valuation bridge. Recent HPC leases clear $140–$190/kW/month. Phase 1 alone (133 MW IT, 15-yr NNN, ~45% NUAI economics) supports analyst floor work of ~$3.55–$8.16/share; Phase 1 + half of Phase 2, ~$6.80–$15.64. The $11 PT credits 283 of ~933 MW potential. The analytical crux: ~$6.25 today embeds legacy-E&P-plus-option value; a signed Big-4 lease re-bases the multiple to contracted-infrastructure comps (private marks ~25x NOI; public REIT/infra peers ~19–29x EBITDA). And critically, every figure above is TCDC-only — it credits a fraction of one campus and assigns zero to the rest: remaining TCDC phases toward 1+ GW, the ~7 GW New Mexico site, and management's stated multi-site pipeline. The first lease isn't just a TCDC re-rate; it's the proof-of-execution that turns a single-asset story into a repeatable platform, and in this cohort deal flow tends to accelerate sharply once the anchor signature de-risks the developer. The floor math understates the option value precisely because it stops at TCDC.

8. Financing / dilution. The market reflexively discounts micro-cap developers for dilution risk, but the playbook this whole cohort converged on (e.g., project-level non-recourse debt) is built to fund the build without repeatedly hitting the corporate equity line. NUAI is pointed the same way: Macquarie's facility sits at the TCDC SPV, the Stream/Apollo JV is expected to carry ~80% project debt plus institutional equity, and NUAI's land contribution offsets part of its cash equity. The dilutive cleanup (SharonAI overhang, going-concern) is largely behind them, which strongly implies funding from here can be minimally dilutive at the parent — the difference between compounding equity value per share and treadmilling it.

9. Flow catalyst. NUAI is on FTSE Russell's preliminary additions list for the Russell 3000 and Russell Microcap indexes, effective at the open June 29. In a thin, ~84%-float micro-cap, mechanical index buying can move price independent of fundamentals — and the post-event flow vacuum is a known reversal risk.

10. EV, not conviction. Illustratively — subjective inputs, not a model — assign ~45–55% to a lease landing within ~12 months, a re-rate toward the lower-mid of the floor range on success, and a substantial (not total) drawdown on failure/dilution/slippage. Even at conservative odds the convexity is positive: the downside is partially floored by legacy assets and site value, while the upside is a multiple of spot. The asymmetry is the reason to hold it — and the wide variance is the reason to keep it small.

---------------------------------------------------
How much of a deal is already in the price? Strip NUAI to its deal-agnostic floor. Assume TCDC land at $100M, a deliberately low ~$15M on the legacy E&P assets (below even the analyst's ~$19M low case), and ~$60M cash per the June report, less modest drawn project debt. That's roughly $150M of identifiable asset value — ~$1.20–1.50/share on ~125M fully diluted shares. Everything above that is the market paying for commercialization it hasn't seen yet. At ~$6.18 / ~$595M, that means ~$150M is asset-backed and ~$445M (~75% of the cap) is pure deal optionality. This is not a stock where a lease is "priced in" — it's a stock where little else is.

Now treat the lease as the binary it is. If Phase 1 signs and NUAI re-rates to the $11 PT, and if it fails back to the ~$1.35 floor, the current ~$6.15 solves to an implied ~50% probability of a Phase 1 deal — a coin flip. That's the first insight: at today's price you're paying roughly fair odds for the first leg, nothing more.

The second leg is where the asymmetry lives. A Phase 1 signature doesn't just validate 133 MW — it makes leasing the rest of TCDC effectively inevitable, because the same hyperscaler, the same islanded-power solution, and the same JV machinery are now proven and in place. The analyst's own sensitivity table reflects this: 283 MW supports ~$11, but ~433 MW supports ~$17, and fuller TCDC credit runs higher — so a ~$20 post-signing fair valueis reasonable once the market extrapolates from "one phase" to "the campus." Re-run the binary against $20 instead of $11, and the current price implies only a ~26% probability of success — i.e., the market is under-pricing the conditional outcome. Put differently: if you handicap the lease at ~50/50 and believe the signed-state is worth ~$20, fair value today is ~0.5 × $20 + 0.5 × $1.35 ≈ $10.70, ~75% above spot.

And ~50% is almost certainly too low as a real-world estimate — it's just what the tape implies. Per the June 15 Northland note, the hyperscaler is actively prioritizing TCDC as other Stream developments slip, is pushing for pre-YE27 delivery, and is steering the project toward the islanded BTM design that strips out the interconnection risk — that's a counterparty leaning in, not kicking tires. But the more important point for handicapping is that the bet does not rest on this specific lease. The binary above treats "deal" as one tenant signing one contract; in reality NUAI has redundancy on both sides of the table. On the demand side, every hyperscaler is power-starved, so a powered, shovel-ready Permian campus with secured generation is a scarce, fungible asset — if the current counterparty stalls, the site doesn't lose its value, it just changes buyers. On the supply/execution side, NUAI isn't even locked to a single developer: neighbors like CIFR and APLD operate adjacent Odessa capacity, understand the power topology intimately, and carry their own hyperscaler relationships — any of them could plausibly step in as developer/operator and accelerate a deal rather than restart one. So the failure case isn't "no deal ever," it's "a slower or differently-structured deal," which is a far smaller haircut to the floor than the binary assumes.

The takeaway: the market is pricing a coin-flip to $11, but the true odds of somecommercialization are higher than 50% — the tenant is already prioritizing the site, and even a broken deal likely reroutes to another power-hungry hyperscaler or a neighboring developer rather than to zero. That means you're getting two things underpriced at once: the probability of a signature andthe $11→$20 second-order re-rate once the rest of TCDC becomes obvious. Your edge isn't betting the lease happens; it's that both the odds and the conditional payoff are higher than the tape is crediting.

Bottom line. Risk is a function of two variables, not one: the probability of an outcome and the price you pay for it. The mature names are genuinely "safer" on probability — APLD, CIFR, HUT have already signed large hyperscale offtakes, so the binary NUAI still faces is, for them, resolved. But that safety is fully priced. TeraWulf is already ~$14.5B, Applied Digital ~$13B, Cipher ~$12B. For any of them to 5x means underwriting a $60–75B large-cap infrastructure outcome — possible, but a heavy lift, and the explosive part of that move is behind you.

NUAI is the inverse: lower probability, dramatically cheaper price — and that price is what makes a 5x still fully warranted here. At ~650M, a 5x is only ~$4B. That's not aggressive; it's roughly where the market values the *pre-contract* version of this exact story today. Fermi ( FRMI), a grid-independent AI-power campus developer with no binding tenant yet, carries a ~$6B market cap — and it IPO'd at roughly $16B with zero revenue or operating history. So ~$4B for NUAI doesn't require it to out-execute the cohort; it requires NUAI to simply be recognized as a credible developer with a hyperscaler lease — at which point it would still sit below pre-deal Fermi and at roughly a quarter of the $12–15B names that have already signed. A signed Big-4 lease re-rates the stock to $15+ as a conservative initial marker (floor-valuation math), with the path to the full 5x opening as the broader platform — remaining TCDC phases, New Mexico, follow-on sites — gets credited. The asymmetry is the entire point: you're paying micro-cap price for an asset the market repeatedly values in the billions before the contract even prints.

That configuration — institutional-grade validators (Apollo/Stream, Macquarie), a valuation still embedding mostly option value, and a setup this audience has personally traded to profit — is rare, and it only sharpens as the Oct 2026 lease window narrows from "someday" to "this quarter." The move is further amplified by mechanics this cohort knows cold: heavy short interest, anticipation of follow-on deals, and passive/index demand into the June 29 Russell add.

---------------------------------------------------
One practical point on building a position in NUAI. A low cost basis isn't just nice math — it's the mechanism that lets you actually stay in the trade long enough to collect the payoff. These names do not re-rate in a straight line; volatility is the toll, not the detour. Say the lease prints and NUAI runs to $20. It will, at some point, draw down to $14 — a ~30% pullback is not the exception in this cohort, it's the near-certainty. The entire difference in how you experience that move is your basis.

If you formed the bulk of your position in the $5–8 range, a slide from $20 to $14 is a wobble inside a triple. You're still up ~2x; you hold easily, and you probably add. If you chased the breakout and bought at $20, that exact same $14 print is a 30% loss staring at you in red — and that's precisely the moment investors capitulate, selling the bottom of a pullback in a stock that's still working. Same security, same price, opposite outcome — decided entirely by where you got in. Loss aversion is real, and it does its worst damage to high-basis holders. So accumulate small and DCA in the $5–8 range, keep dry powder for the seasonally soft July tape, and build the position before the move rather than into it. The low basis is what converts a correct thesis into a return you actually keep, instead of a great call you fumbled on a routine drawdown.

[Kash @KashRamki]

The latest research report on $NUAI from Northland is solid. While I think the price target of $11/sh is highly conservative - I peg it between ~$20/sh on the first 200MW deal alone - there are several insightful nuggets regarding the company’s latest hires and the 206MW power contract between Vistra and $CIFR.

Between that and my meeting with NUAI management at the Macquarie AI infrastructure conference last week, things appear well on track.

NUAI felt like a slam dunk to me last year, when I began investing in this company. TCDC is a pristine asset with an excellent team in Will and Charlie. They have since executed on several fronts: balance sheet cleanup, new credit facility with Macquarie, excellent management hires to broaden out the bench, strong partnerships with leaders such as PDI and Stream, improving competitive positioning with tactical land acquisitions and addressing frivolous lawsuits. Remarkable progress in the past 6mths.

The BTM strategy is the one of the most misunderstood and asymmetric opportunities in today’s datacenter market. Even those in the industry don’t fully understand the virtues of this approach. Most good things take time to be fully appreciated. This is no different. What’s strange here is that @elonmusk has already done this at Colossus and people are still in disbelief that BTM is viable.

If you value this company based on the 1GW at TCDC, 650MW of which have already been detailed by management, at ~45-50% interest in the development, NUAI is a ~$10bn company. I suspect it gets there quickly.

The patient investor will be rewarded here.

NFA

[₿itcoin ₿utcher 🥩 🐑 🐷 @bitcoinbutcher1]

https://t.co/PcPtgvNP9b

[Elias Marshall @_eliasmarshall]

If you read only one thing this week, read this article.

[Dan Loewenherz @dwlz]

My goodness the Ramp folks are absolute animals.

This memo is very good btw. They are really looking around the corner. Frontier models are not becoming cheaper as literally every lab spokesperson says. The models are getting more expensive and when the focus starts turning to ROI the decision of what model to use for which task becomes ever more important.

I can't say much about the valuation, which granted is absolutely insane, except the team is absolutely bonkers and the products they build are exceptionally well done.

Kicking myself that I left my museum quality corporate card in a card reader at the Bowery citizenM. That thing was beautiful.

Congrats folks. It really is amazing seeing how far this company has gone since I became a user in mid-2022. 👏🏻

[The Kobeissi Letter @KobeissiLetter]

BREAKING: Iran officially reopens the Strait of Hormuz for ALL commercial vessels for the remaining period of the ceasefire.

Iran's statement below:

"In line with the ceasefire in Lebanon, the passage for all commercial vessels through Strait of Hormuz is declared completely open for the remaining period of ceasefire, on the coordinated route as already announced by Ports and Maritime Organization of the Islamic Rep. of Iran."

[Lisan al Gaib @scaling01]

Anthropic now valued at above $1.05 trillion

meanwhile OpenAI is still at $850B

[Kash @KashRamki]

These are half-truths disguised as a ‘thesis’. One simply has to scratch beyond the surface to refute all of what is said here.

On litigation:

The AG’s claims don’t pass muster. All you had to read was the lawsuit and a transcript of management’s response in earnings calls and interviews. What the AG has done is unprecedented in that there was zero consultation with the company before the he filed his claim. If they had followed protocol, the AG would have realized quickly that he is eating the governments money. But then again, water and government go hand in hand. Now, even if the AG’s claims are true, which my own litigation lawyers have confirmed aren’t, then it’s a max ~$10M hit to a company worth billions. As for the reputations implications, disregarding the negligent way the AG has gone about this, such lawsuits are common in the E&P sector and don’t speak to the character of the management team involved.

As for the class actions, since you haven’t read them, let me summarize all of them for you: A certain group of retail investors bought high and sold low. Wait, what?? A group of retail investors bought high and sold low?? That’s never happened before! Wait, there’s more?? Some of them even were disgruntled and had some extra change to throw at an ambulance chasing lawyer?? No way! Ok, I’ll stop with the hyperbole and remind you that IREN has exactly the same type of lawsuits against it. Don’t worry. You don’t need to sell your IREN position. Dan isn’t a fraudster either.

I don’t think you spend much time looking at small caps because the vast majority of them are subject to I) stock price manipulation by short sellers or II) frivolous lawsuits trying to extort the company or, in $NUAI’s case iii) both of these groups working in concert for ulterior motives. A two-bit short seller named FuzzyPanda, god rest his soul, actually took a short position against NUAI, crafted a clever but baseless short report against the company, and sent it to the AG encouraging a lawsuit. My checks confirm this is likely the case as I) the timing of the short report and the AG’s lawsuits are perfectly on top of each other and II) Fuzzy, may the lord have mercy on him, has been known to do this several times in the past. RIP Fuzzy.

On execution risk:

This was a valid point about 4 months ago. Since then you’ve had the crème de la crème partner with $NUAI to resolve exactly this risk: Primary Digital, Stream, Ted Warner of Northland, Macquarie, Mizuho, and of course, the investment grade hyperscaler that remains in late stage conversations with the company despite all this noise. ALL of these relationships came AFTER (or have strengthened since) the lawsuits, not before.

Why you chose to ignore all of these facts in your “thesis” is beyond me. My 2 cents:
if you’re serious about investing, you should start by doing some real research.

[High Convexity @ConvexityStocks]

Soon.

[Dulce @litigious_dulce]

This statistic explains why the hyperscaler was so insistent on selecting Stream as $NUAI's execution partner. Too many developers are pretenders, and the hyperscaler picked the one it could trust.

[The God Particle @_Sgr_A_Star]

$NUAI

Any NUAI fans in the house?

NUAI just got it's first 2 Analysts coverage.

Texas Capital initiated coverage with a 'Buy' Recommendation and a $8.60 Target Price.

Northland Securities initiated coverage with a 'Outperform' Recommendation and a $11 Target Price.

👀

[Prudent Whale Research @ThePrudentWhale]

Updated the $NUAI model. Added an EBITDA multiple based valuation alongside the NOI / cap rate valuation. Both screenshots below reflect base case assumptions.

View v19 here:

https://t.co/tPJOy1Skmi

[Dulce @litigious_dulce]

Northland just initiated coverage on $NUAI. I wonder if more shorts will cover. But perhaps @FuzzyPandaShort knows why analyst coverage is bearish?

[Prudent Whale Research @ThePrudentWhale]

$NUAI now has an $11 institutional PT. Not too shabby.