Totally agree. The earnings presentation was widely misunderstood. I actually liked what was shown, but I'm afraid the bottom isn't in yet. With the potential rate hike and the carry trade unwind, things could go downhill significantly—even if that has nothing to do with their actual fundamentals.
@aktien_max Bin investiert und werde erhöhen. Investmentthese: Wenn Agentic AI und Robotik Mainstream werden, kann es nicht genug Memory und Storage geben.
A few people have Thursday's numbers tangled, so let me untangle them.
The majority of the $684m loss is the cost of retiring Bitcoin miners as we convert those sites to AI Cloud. Non-cash. The cloud business underneath ran ~87% gross margins (ex D&A).
Every megawatt that comes off mining goes back on at multiples of the revenue. Recent 3-year AI Cloud contracts are at >$20m per MW (IT), more than double late last year.
And the $25-30bn of forecasted FY27 capex isn't an equity number. Customer prepayments can cover about half the GPU capex. Lenders can fund most of the rest. We raised ~$19bn over the last twelve months and only ~$3bn of it was equity. We haven't borrowed a dollar against the data centers yet either.
$4bn of ARR is contracted, with three sites commissioning between now and year end to bring it online. And that's the 2026 story. The real ramp is 2027, when Sweetwater and the next wave of capacity come into play.
It's delivery time.
Why should money lose 2% of its purchasing power every year? If productivity doubles, why do we print more money instead of letting prices fall?
A deep dive into inflation, debt, interest rates, malinvestment — and the Austrian critique of modern monetary conomics. From apples to Argentina. 👇
@MDividende12 Heiße Woche, um Aktien zu kaufen. Erneute Iran-Eskalation. Yen wird wieder stärker, was dazu führen könnte, dass der Carry Trade abgewickelt wird. Und diese Woche kommen Arbeitsmarktdaten.
Following up on this morning’s signals — here’s how I’d sort what breaks first if all three forces actually compound.
Not every asset responds to “oil up, rates up, yen unwind” the same way. The mechanism matters more than the label.
The most exposed layer is long-duration, cash-burning growth names — especially ones already carrying real leverage (convertible debt, GPU-backed financing). They take the rate-hike hit through the discount rate, and if a carry-trade unwind forces indiscriminate deleveraging, they’re exactly the kind of liquid, crowded, popular trade that gets sold first regardless of the underlying thesis. August 2024 showed this mechanism doesn’t check quality before it sells.
Existing-cashflow names sit one layer down in exposure — nuclear and gas generation running today, semiconductor names with real current earnings. They’re not immune to multiple compression in a broad risk-off move, but there’s a cash-flow floor under them that pure-growth stories don’t have.
Government- and defense-backed demand (fuel enrichment, naval-grade engineering, anything tied to sovereign contracts rather than consumer or enterprise cycles) is the most structurally insulated from the demand side of this — but the stock price still isn’t insulated from forced, liquidity-driven selling in a genuine deleveraging event. Structural insulation protects the business. It doesn’t protect the ticker on the worst days.
The energy names are the one place this scenario cuts the other way — a sustained Hormuz disruption is a direct tailwind, not a risk, for anything actually producing oil and gas rather than consuming capital to build data centers.
Can markets absorb this without a broader deleveraging cycle? Maybe. But the honest answer is knowing in advance which of your positions you’d hold through a 30-40% drawdown because the thesis survives, and which ones you’d only be holding because you hadn’t decided yet.
Morning Signals
Three markets are telling the same story this morning: oil, rates and the yen.
The common denominator is rising pressure on global financial conditions.
1. Hormuz is back in the inflation equation
U.S. strikes on Iranian launchers near the Strait of Hormuz triggered a renewed jump in oil, with Brent moving back above $90/bbl. U.S. and European equity futures are lower as markets reassess the risk to energy flows.
The transmission mechanism is straightforward:
Hormuz risk → oil ↑ → inflation expectations ↑ → Fed easing probability ↓
The important variable is not today’s oil price. It is how long the physical disruption lasts.
2. Warsh has changed the rate narrative
Markets are now pricing roughly a 57% probability of a September Fed hike, while the U.S. 2-year Treasury yield has moved toward 4.33%.
But the deeper question remains whether Warsh actually provided “guidance” or simply reiterated a reaction function:
If inflation doesn’t move toward 2% → policy may need to become more restrictive.
That distinction matters. The next major test is the incoming labor and inflation data, not the speech itself.
3. And then there is the yen
USD/JPY has moved back above 160, despite the U.S.-Japan intervention in July. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has warned that disorderly yen moves can destabilize global markets.
This is where the story gets more interesting.
For years, investors could:
Borrow yen cheaply → buy higher-yielding global assets → earn the spread.
But now:
U.S. yields ↑ + USD/JPY ↑ + intervention risk ↑
creates the possibility of a violent reversal.
If the yen suddenly strengthens, leveraged investors may have to:
Buy yen → sell the assets financed with yen → deleverage → transmit stress across global markets.
That is why the yen is more than a currency story.
It is a global liquidity variable.
The bigger picture
We now have three potentially reinforcing forces:
Hormuz → physical inflation shock
Warsh → tighter monetary reaction function
Yen → potential global liquidity shock
And there is a fourth force working in the opposite direction:
Venezuela → potential long-term expansion of global oil supply + U.S. SPR rebuilding.
So the market is caught between short-term scarcity and long-term supply expansion, while monetary policy is becoming more sensitive to inflation and global leverage is being tested through the yen.
The key question this week is therefore not simply:
“Will the Fed hike?”
It is:
Can global markets absorb higher energy prices and tighter U.S. financial conditions without triggering a broader deleveraging cycle?
That is the signal I am watching.
Morning Signals
Three markets are telling the same story this morning: oil, rates and the yen.
The common denominator is rising pressure on global financial conditions.
1. Hormuz is back in the inflation equation
U.S. strikes on Iranian launchers near the Strait of Hormuz triggered a renewed jump in oil, with Brent moving back above $90/bbl. U.S. and European equity futures are lower as markets reassess the risk to energy flows.
The transmission mechanism is straightforward:
Hormuz risk → oil ↑ → inflation expectations ↑ → Fed easing probability ↓
The important variable is not today’s oil price. It is how long the physical disruption lasts.
2. Warsh has changed the rate narrative
Markets are now pricing roughly a 57% probability of a September Fed hike, while the U.S. 2-year Treasury yield has moved toward 4.33%.
But the deeper question remains whether Warsh actually provided “guidance” or simply reiterated a reaction function:
If inflation doesn’t move toward 2% → policy may need to become more restrictive.
That distinction matters. The next major test is the incoming labor and inflation data, not the speech itself.
3. And then there is the yen
USD/JPY has moved back above 160, despite the U.S.-Japan intervention in July. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has warned that disorderly yen moves can destabilize global markets.
This is where the story gets more interesting.
For years, investors could:
Borrow yen cheaply → buy higher-yielding global assets → earn the spread.
But now:
U.S. yields ↑ + USD/JPY ↑ + intervention risk ↑
creates the possibility of a violent reversal.
If the yen suddenly strengthens, leveraged investors may have to:
Buy yen → sell the assets financed with yen → deleverage → transmit stress across global markets.
That is why the yen is more than a currency story.
It is a global liquidity variable.
The bigger picture
We now have three potentially reinforcing forces:
Hormuz → physical inflation shock
Warsh → tighter monetary reaction function
Yen → potential global liquidity shock
And there is a fourth force working in the opposite direction:
Venezuela → potential long-term expansion of global oil supply + U.S. SPR rebuilding.
So the market is caught between short-term scarcity and long-term supply expansion, while monetary policy is becoming more sensitive to inflation and global leverage is being tested through the yen.
The key question this week is therefore not simply:
“Will the Fed hike?”
It is:
Can global markets absorb higher energy prices and tighter U.S. financial conditions without triggering a broader deleveraging cycle?
That is the signal I am watching.
Hormuz Just Became a Fed Problem Again
The U.S. just struck two Iranian rocket launchers on Larak Island after detecting preparations to deploy sea mines into the Strait of Hormuz.
Iran has vowed retaliation.
This matters far beyond geopolitics.
Hormuz is one of the world’s most important energy chokepoints, historically carrying roughly one-fifth of global oil and LNG flows. The latest strike comes just days after the U.S. said existing mines had been cleared from the main shipping lanes.
The transmission mechanism is straightforward:
Iran escalation → shipping risk → oil/LNG risk premium → inflation expectations → Fed reaction function → Treasury yields → cost of capital
And the timing is particularly important.
Kevin Warsh has just told markets that the Fed needs to remain disciplined if inflation fails to move convincingly toward 2%.
A renewed energy shock is something monetary policy cannot manufacture away.
The Fed can tighten financial conditions.
It cannot produce another barrel of oil, LNG cargo or a functioning shipping lane.
That creates an uncomfortable combination:
Higher-for-longer monetary policy + higher energy risk premium
And that matters for every capital-intensive sector:
AI data centers.
Grid infrastructure.
Nuclear.
Industrial construction.
Space.
At the same time, the U.S. is pursuing a long-term strategy to increase energy supply through Venezuela and rebuild the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.
So the bigger picture is becoming a battle between short-term physical scarcity and long-term supply expansion.
The next move from Iran matters enormously.
If Hormuz stays operational, the energy risk premium can continue to compress.
If Iran attempts to mine or disrupt the strait again, the entire inflation/Fed narrative could reprice very quickly.
The market isn’t just trading oil anymore.
It’s trading the interaction between physical energy scarcity and monetary policy.
For anyone who wants to understand how the Yen can impact global markets:
Japan has spent decades providing the world with cheap funding.
Investors borrow Yen at low rates → convert it into USD → buy stocks, bonds, crypto and other risk assets.
That’s the Yen carry trade.
The danger comes when the Yen suddenly strengthens:
Yen ↑ → carry trades become less profitable → investors unwind positions → assets are sold → Yen is bought back → Yen strengthens further → more positions get liquidated.
That creates a potential global liquidity spiral.
And there’s a second channel:
Japan is a major holder of US Treasuries. If Japan needs to support the Yen or repatriate capital, Treasury selling can push US yields higher.
Higher yields → higher global financing costs → lower valuations, especially for long-duration growth assets.
So the Yen is not just a Japanese currency story.
It is potentially a global liquidity story.
For anyone trying to understand why something happening in Tokyo can eventually hit Nasdaq, Bitcoin and high-growth tech stocks, this is the mechanism to understand.