I suspect we are at a point now where it makes less sense to dig any deeper to “unearth” hidden gems in the optical build out. That could actually be a costly mistake.
Sure, maybe one can find an asymmetrical player that yields a quick return.
But I doubt it’ll beat simply holding the long term beneficiaries. The giants in the making.
What feels like the best options — to me at least — is to make sure I understand the big long term beneficiaries well enough to endure volatility over time and to not get distracted by going “nicher and nicher”.
Very rarely are we able to invest in an aggressive build out like this one. Better simplify it and make sure we capture the core of it, rather than getting too smart for ourselves.
@ChairmansLedger At the end of the day. This is simply a bet that AI is the most transformational technology we’ve ever created or it’s not. Too many smart people believe it is and they’ve already moved past ROI to issues of how to manage and control it. This is not a bubble.
@Umbisam That’s the definition of a bubble. If you’re really in one very few people actually realize it. But most normies and the MSM are talking about it non stop. Hence no bubble as there are still a shit ton of people on sidelines. The bubble starts when all these folks jump in.
@ShawarmaCapital This is definitely not thesis breaking. Not even close. Bad decision making in what’s probably a hectic startup environment with no set marketing strategy or philosophy yet? Yes.
@moninvestor@mcF_dan Not getting a pump from Jensen is irrelevant. All that matters is execution there’s still work to do on that front and things are going in the right direction.
The investing equivalent of the sunk cost fallacy. The price you paid should have no bearing on the future decisions about a stock. Only where you believe it’s going and how much exposure you want to that opportunity.
Opportunity Cost and Decision Making
One concept I find a lot of people struggle with a lot despite it being wired in our intelligence is the concept of opportunity cost
It's a key concept in economics.
Definition: The value of the next-best alternative that you give up when making a choice. It is the benefit or potential gain of the option you didn't select.
Why would you pick choice B, when choice A has higher economic value?
I've been thinking about this, because I find it fascinating that people are unwilling to take a loss on an asset for the pure idea they don't want to take a loss.
But would you take a loss if you had greater confidence the next asset you were buying had greater long term economic value than your initial asset?
People become fixated on trying to recoup their loss, without seeing the opportunity. And the fact the next opportunity could have far greater economic value. I've always thought about it like this:
It's ok to lose money, if you gain time; it's ok to lose time, if you make lots of money; it's not ok to lose money and time.
By trying to wait for your losers to recover, you effectively lose time and money
This concept can be applied to anything, but obviously on X we talk a lot about stocks. Really, if you're down 25% on a stock, it's fine to sell, if there is confidence that what buy from the sale has greater long term economic value on the original stock.
And if you have a hard time figuring out economic value, then it might be a good time to review a foundational economic framework as a basis for your decisions
@ThematicTrader@daniel_koss@daniel_koss has his part to play in this, you have a point for sure in the way Daniel goes about things but the way you have gone about it is also disingenuous after he gave you a platform. You are just engagement farming and will lose your own credibility now.
@TacticzH@daniel_koss I don’t think he is genuinely trying to mislead people but his style is very unique and confusing to most outsiders. He is a trader first, investor second but the public perception is this opposite. I think he will fix it.
Investing is mostly psychological.
> You don't need to catch every stock.
> You don't need to follow every guru.
> You just need a process that makes sense to you, one you can stick with over time.
> You need to know yourself (your goals, your emotions and your time horizon).
@boring_invest This is why, while it will look very different, I don’t think software and software companies are going away. Just cos you can vibe code your own software doesn’t mean you will and if you do it doesn’t mean it will actually be good. Way too much doomerism about AI out there.
@LeonMensbridge Not thesis breaking. But I was late to this and my average was in the low 7’s and so the upside is not great for me so I took what I could before they announce that delay later this year. Still very bullish long term.