This is the first step of the sell-side capitulation cycle, exactly as predicted.
Goldman Sachs just publicly admitted that its previous 2030 model for Wegovy oral was underestimating Novo Nordisk by more than 2x. The cuota projection raised from 16% to 38%. Peak sales estimate raised from 8 billion to 17.4 billion dollars. All in a single revision note.
A revision of this magnitude is not a routine update. It is an admission that the underlying analytical framework was structurally wrong.
Yet Goldman continues to project Foundayo as the obesity oral market leader despite explicitly acknowledging in the same note that Wegovy oral has demonstrated stronger launch momentum. This is mathematically inconsistent.
If Wegovy oral has stronger launch momentum, captures 38% projected share by 2030, has full FDA approval in the US plus EMA approval in the EU plus MHRA approval in the UK, while Foundayo is approved only in the US with no path to EU or UK approval for at least 18 months, then Foundayo cannot logically be the structural market leader. The model contradicts itself.
The inconsistency is the tell. Sell-side analysts are updating their underlying numbers while simultaneously protecting their previous positioning narrative. This is exactly how institutional capitulation unfolds in practice: step by step, never admitting the prior call was wrong outright, always preserving narrative continuity to provide cover for ongoing portfolio rotation flows.
The Lilly dominance thesis structurally breaks when the next earnings prints force the next mandatory revision. Q2 earnings on August 6 will be the first hard inflection. Q3 in November confirms trajectory. Q4 plus 2027 guidance in February 2027 forces structural reprice across the entire sell-side coverage universe.
Goldman just took the first step today. The next steps follow. $NVO $LLY
@franklin_tzz@mrddmia@FoxBusiness Alright then, here in Novo Nordisk land, Denmark, we’ll cancel our F-35 order and spend the money on free healthcare instead. Denmark First 🇩🇰
Tariffs are taxes paid by American importers, not foreign govts, meaning the money “flowing in” is actually coming from US businesses and consumers, not China, India or anyone else.
It’s like robbing your own citizens and calling it foreign income. For someone who claims to be a business genius, not understanding this basic economic principle either points to a dangerously low IQ or deliberate deception, and neither is reassuring.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
@MichaelVektor Tak for dit input, dem vil jeg se nærmere på.
Jeg har en mindre position i VanEck Quantum Computing UCITS ETF, som jeg synes er interessant bet på lang sigt.
BREAKING: Senator Adam Schiff just announced he is formally opening an investigation to see if members of Donald Trump’s Administration illegally profited off of today’s stock market shenanigans. Retweet to make sure every American sees this.
@dagensaktiedk Jeg er også investeret i enkeltaktier som du - både frie midler og pension. Men med dine beregninger giver det ikke mening… Det må være mit nytårsfortsæt at omlægge det hele, selvom jeg synes det er interessant at følge med i selskabernes udvikling
@dagensaktiedk Det er interessante beregninger.
I samme periode har Berkshire Hathaway leveret 16,32% CAGR.
Så hvis man foretrækker en mere passiv tilgang og vil balancere ift Skat, så kan man tilvælge Berkshire, som ikke er lagerbeskattet som S&P ETF er det.
@ClausSorensen@dagensaktiedk Claus, har du fortsat din position i IONQ?
Jeg solgte i sidste uge ift skat, men overvejer at købe igen. Den er bare enorm dyr på de her niveauer
@dagensaktiedk@RiskmindsCom@venturaFPC Eller din hustru kunne oprette en konto i sit navn, som du har fuldmagt til. Så kan du sælge på dit depot og købe på hendes.