全部推文
共 6749 条 · 第 85 / 225 页 · 滚到底自动加载更多
-
调侃特朗普没说要“抓住伊朗”。
@d0cJ_ 他倒是没说要“grab Iran by the Strait”呢。
英文原文
@d0cJ_ He didn’t go as far as to say he would grab Iran by the Strait though.
-
觉得特朗普的帖子看起来不像真的。
我刚开始还以为这是假的。 我们总统真会发这种帖子吗？ 抛开表面意思不谈，市场居然真的会因为特朗普的发帖而动，而不是看基本面，这一点也没那么好玩……
英文原文
I thought this was fake for a sec. How is this a real post from our President? Optics aside, not as fun when markets move based on Trump posts over fundamentals… https://t.co/zggOoEejWu
-
认为 SOFI 还可以，而一些用稀释去抬股价的逻辑很扯。
$SOFI 这家公司本身没问题。 我觉得 X 上关于银行阻止竞争对手提供收益的逻辑挺有意思的…… 就像让 Wells Fargo 的活期账户比 4% APY 的稳定币银行更有竞争力。 这可能会成为最聪明的观点之一？ 还是说，像 $AMC 那种通过稀释把股东洗掉、结果股价反而能涨 20 倍的逻辑更聪明？
英文原文
$SOFI as a company is fine. I think the X community logic behind banks banning competitors from offering yield… Making Wells Fargo checking accounts more competitive than 4% APY stablecoin banks. Might take the lead as the highest IQ take? Or maybe the $AMC dilution to wipe out shareholders as a way to 20x the share price might be smarter?
-
听完评论后，投票支持 SOFI 胜过 IREN。
@AverageDipBuyer 我看完你的评论后，投票支持 $SOFI 胜过 $IREN。
英文原文
@AverageDipBuyer I'm voting for $SOFI over $IREN after reading your comment.
-
怀疑 IREN 的 60 亿美元 ATM 稀释逻辑比破产素肉公司的百倍情景还合理。
@qxiAixp 我不太确定。 我觉得 $IREN 那 60 亿美元 ATM 的逻辑，可能比那些破产素肉公司的 200 倍情景还更看多一点？
英文原文
@qxiAixp I'm not sure about that. I think the logic behind $IREN's $6,000,000,000 ATM might be more bullish than the 200x case for bankrupt vegan meat companies?
-
只有链接，没有正文。
仅有链接。
英文原文
@simplehumannews https://t.co/m2p9hdyoZd
-
把自己列为 X 上最聪明投资者之一的话题，显得像玩笑。
X 上谁是最聪明的投资者？ 名单里有 $SOFI、$AMC、$IREN 和 $BYND。
英文原文
Who are the smartest investors on X? In the lineup we have $SOFI, $AMC, $IREN, and $BYND.
-
指出 AI 供应链极度集中，很多产能最终会落到越南。
@0xkyle__ AI 行业的供应链集中度极高（这其实也适用于国防），而且出人意料的是，其中很多最后都落到了越南。 在中国之外，能做大批量量产的替代地并不多……也许只有哈萨克斯坦一部分。
英文原文
@0xkyle__ There's extreme supply chain concentration in the AI sector (this was for defense), and a lot of it ends up in Vietnam surprisingly. Not exactly any alternatives out there for volume outside of China... maybe only Kazakhstan for some.
-
感叹 EOS.AX 一年回报 725% 很夸张。
@wolfgangkasper 是啊，$EOS.AX 一年回报 725% 确实太夸张了。 我错过了那班车，但总会有新的。
英文原文
@wolfgangkasper yeah 725% 1Y return for $EOS.AX is pretty insane. I missed that train, but there's always new ones. https://t.co/DMxr0xjjzm
-
分析太空光学地面站基础设施瓶颈及受益标的。
太空瓶颈：光学地面基础设施。 - “整个行业大约只建成了 10% 的光学地面基础设施” 那么，谁会受益？ - $EOS.ASX（在 Mount Stromlo 运营站点，配有“自适应光学”） - $SKPJF（TYO: 9412）| $NTTYY | Space Compass 是 NTT 与卫星运营商 SKY Perfect JSAT 的合资公司 - $SGBAF - 与 Cailabs 合作，做地面光学终端 - $SAFRY - 光学地面站制造商 如果这条路线失败，备选就会是： $VSAT、$GILT 分析指出，如果光学 mesh 因为云层或地面站不足而失败，架构会“退回到 Ka-band RF 链路”。 -> 短期资本会流向中继服务商（Kepler、Space Compass、General Atomics） -> 长期结构性赢家会是光子硬件制造商（Cailabs、Safran） -> 然后像 SpaceX 这样的公司会默认受益。很多还是私有公司。 “这个基础设施缺口现在已经不只是工程问题，而是对白宫[Golden Dome]重大政策目标的直接威胁。” 在实体地面基础设施扩张之前，轨道激光通信市场会被硬性封顶，因此这就是当前的瓶颈。 但我不太确定 capex 的规模是否已经接近超大规模客户 AI 建设那种级别，足以让这些公司明显受益。
英文原文
The Space Bottleneck: Optical ground infrastructure. - "The industry has built roughly 10 percent of the optical ground infrastructure" Now, who are the beneficiaries? - $EOS.ASX (operating stations at Mt. Stromlo equipped with "adaptive optics.") - $SKPJF (TYO: 9412) | $NTTYY | Space Compass is JV with NTT and satellite operator SKY Perfect JSAT - $SGBAF - Works with Cailabs to for terrestrial optical terminals - $SAFRY - Manufacturer of the optical ground stations Then if it fails fallback would be names like: $VSAT, $GILT Analysis states that if the optical mesh fails due to clouds or lack of stations, the architecture "falls back to Ka-band RF links". -> Near term capital flows to Relay Providers (Kepler, Space Compass, General Atomics). -> Long term structural winners will be the photonics hardware manufacturers (Cailabs, Safran). -> Then companies like SpaceX wins by default. Many are private. "This infrastructure deficit is no longer just an engineering problem but a direct threat to a major White House [Golden Dome] policy objective" Orbital laser communications market are hard-capped until physical ground infra scales, hence the current bottleneck. But not quite sure if capex is to the scale of hyperscaler AI buildouts yet to benefit these companies enough.
-
认为西班牙相比越南更西方阵营化，澳洲 / 西班牙相关供应链值得关注。
@Jesusjlloret 是的，正如另一条评论提到的那样，和越南相比，西班牙显然更偏西方阵营，而 $EQR 和其他公司都很不错。
英文原文
@Jesusjlloret Yes Spain as another comment mentioned is a lot more western aligned compared to Vietnam, and $EQR and others are great.
-
补充澳洲 / 西班牙是值得关注的供应链区域，但核心仍是保障供给。
这个观点很对，澳大利亚 / 西班牙和 $EQR.AX 都是不错的想法。 我也把越南映射到了其他前沿供应链，所以才把它列为重点关注区域。 不过，核心当然还是尽可能拿到更多供应，而越南刚好是一个稀土 / 关键材料的宝库。
英文原文
That's a good point, Australia/Spain and $EQR.AX is a good shout. There's other frontier supply chains that I mapped to Vietnam, hence why I pointed it out as a major area of interest. But of course, the main thing is securing as much supply as possible and Vietnam just happens to be a treasure trove of rare earths/critical materials.
-
认为越南并未明确倒向中美任何一方。
@DanilSer33 我觉得他们只是处在中间，试图保持中立，并没有明确站在中国或美国任何一边。
英文原文
@DanilSer33 I think they're just in the center and trying to be neutral, don't think they're allied with China or the US in specific. https://t.co/BsRo0r7kwW
-
认为越南会成为西方供应链投资和稀土 / 关键矿产的下一个重点。
越南大概会成为西方供应链投资以及其他关键矿产 / 稀土的下一个重点区域。 其中一个就是钨（全球第二大钨生产国）。 $MSR Masan（越南河内）—— 越南主要的钨股票。举个例子，它过去 1 年涨了 168.33%。 他们先开采原矿，再加工成 APT 和钨粉。 还有很多非常重要的公司，我之后会再列一份清单。 但我确实预计大量美国 / 亚洲资金会流向这个国家。 尤其是在价格上涨、而西方正在确保供应链不再依赖中国 / 俄罗斯的时候。
英文原文
Vietnam is probably the next focus area for Western supply chain investment and other critical minerals/rare earths. Tungsten is just one of them (world's second-largest tungsten producer). $MSR Masan (Hanoi/Vietnam) - Primary tungsten stock in Vietnam. Up +168.33% 1Y, as one example. They mine the raw ore, then process it into APT and tungsten powder. There's many other very important names out there, I'll follow-up with a list later. But I do expect a lot of US/Asian investment to flow into this country. Especially as prices spike and the West secures supply chains independence away from China/Russia.
-
回顾钨等关键材料因出口管制和战争而暴涨。
哦……谁能在一月份就想到钨会这么重要？ “中东战争期间，钨价飙升 557%” 肯定不是像 $ALM 这种公司，它在中国出口管制后，过去 3 个月涨了 75%。 如果你还在找其他需要留意的贵金属 / 关键材料： 铟、铋、碲、钼、锂、锑、镓、锗和石墨……都被列入了出口管制名单。 不幸的是，我自己一直在 $AXTI 上，主要是铟、镓和锗相关的敞口，今年至今也就涨了 215%。 不过，在供应链恐慌期间，还有很多更重要的公司。
英文原文
Oh... who could have thought Tungsten would be important back in January? "Tungsten Price Soars 557% Amid War in Middle East" Certainly not companies like $ALM up 75% this past 3 months after China's export controls. If you're looking for other precious materials to look out for: Indium, Bismuth, Tellurium, Molybdenum, Lithium, Antimony, Gallium, Germanium, and Graphite... were all named in exports controls. Unfortunately, I've been in $AXTI which mainly centered around indium, gallium, and germanium, only up 215% YTD. But, there's a lot more important companies out there during the supply chain panic.
-
强调股票是正和游戏，只有稀释严重时才会伤害长期持有人。
也许你还没意识到，股票和 Melania Coin 不一样，是正和游戏。只要方向判断对了，长期每个人都会受益。 人们买 $LITE、$AEHR 或 $AAOI，并不会变成“退出流动性”；随着价值创造和营收增长，价格是会持续上涨的。 公司会创造经济价值，并通过分红之类的方式回馈散户股东。 当然也有例外，比如 $SNAP 或 $IREN，如果管理层试图通过过度 SBC / 稀释来抽干价值，那就会出问题。
英文原文
Not sure if you realize yet, but stocks are positive sum gain unlike Melania Coin. Everyone benefits long term if someone is right directionally. It's not exit liquidity when people buy $LITE, $AEHR, or $AAOI and the prices go up over time because of value creation + revenue growth. Companies create economic value and return that to retail shareholders through things like dividends. There's exceptions with things like $SNAP or $IREN if there's excessive SBC/dilution if management tries to drain value.
-
谈自己在伯克利做公益，后来对如何帮助别人有了新认识。
帮助无家可归者。我以前在加州大学伯克利分校上学，学校有个叫 People's Park 的公园（好像后来被拆了），很多人会在那里过夜。还有些人在伯克利市中心搭帐篷卖报纸，都是为了勉强活着攒住房子钱，因为加州的一切都太贵了。 我在那几年每天去上课或者去吃午饭时都会经过那里，也和很多住在街头的人成了朋友，所以那段经历改变了我对“我最能帮助谁”的看法。
英文原文
aid for homelessness. went to uc berkeley and we had a park called people's park (think it got removed) where a lot of folks slept. And people who camped out in downtown berkeley to sell newspapers were living day-to-day to get housing because everything was unaffordable in california. Walked by every day to class for a few years or to lunch and made a ton of friends with people who lived on the streets during my time there. so changed my perspective a bit on who I can best help.
-
只是说自己目前先在捐赠，没有接 ETF 想法。
@ParadisLabs 哦，我到现在都只是先把钱捐出去……不过 ETF 的想法听起来确实挺有意思。
英文原文
@ParadisLabs Oh I’ve been just donating it so far... The ETF idea sounds fun though.
-
解释订阅和广告分成的结算节奏不同。
@HyperTechInvest 不是，订阅是按月结算的（你可以看日期），而广告分成是每两周结算一次。
英文原文
@HyperTechInvest Nope, subscriptions are monthly (you can check the date) while ad sharing is every two weeks. https://t.co/2CWiY37kni
-
表示自己没有广告分成也会继续发帖。
@Cloud_Tradez 哈哈，没事，就算没有广告分成或者订阅收入，我也还是会继续在 X 上发帖。 我只是很开心自己有个平台可以分享想法。
英文原文
@Cloud_Tradez lol it’s fine, I’d still be posting on X anyway without any ad sharing or subscription stuff. I’m just happy I get a platform to share my ideas on
-
吐槽 X 的手续费和订阅费结算不透明。
X 的确有延迟打款机制（区块链也能解决这个问题），但他们在费用机制上还不够透明。 比如，X 收我 2 加元，而我给自己的定价是 1 美元，这 46% 的四舍五入差额就直接消失在空气里了。 这还不算 App Store 的 30% 抽成，或者 Stripe 的刷卡交易费。
英文原文
Yep X has a delayed payout system (which also gets solved with blockchain) but aren’t transparent with fee mechanisms on top For example, X charges 2 CAD while I set mine to $1, and that 46% rounding difference disappears into the void. Not including the 30% App Store tax or per card tx fees from Stripe.
-
认为稳定币发行商比单独公链更值得看好。
@rockwell0790 USDC 和其他稳定币都是链无关的，所以它们可以在 Solana 上结算，也可以在自己兼容 EVM 的网络上结算，而且手续费都能用稳定币支付。 相比像 $ETH 这样的单一网络，我对像 $CRCL 这样的稳定币发行商更看多。
英文原文
@rockwell0790 USDC and others are blockchain agnostic so they can settle on Solana or their own EVM compatible network that pays fees in stablecoins. I’m more bullish on stablecoin issuers like $CRCL than i am on individual networks like $ETH.
-
用订阅收入和外汇摩擦说明自己为何看多稳定币。
如果你还在想我为什么看多 $CRCL 和稳定币，这就是原因。 8605 位订阅者，每人 1 美元： -> 1595 美元。 还没算像加拿大这种要多付 46% 的海外订阅费（2 加元对 1 美元订阅），以及外汇 / 四舍五入损耗就直接消失了。 我不是来做订阅收入的，所以我也不打算改什么。 不过即便把按比例分成、或延迟到账之类都算进去，这个现象还是挺有意思的。 你还会进一步减少 30% 的 App Store 费用、Stripe 刷卡交易费，以及其他黑箱费用，比如外币四舍五入损耗。 稳定币肯定就是未来，你已经能看到银行在用 Clarity Act 游说去控制它了。
英文原文
Just in case you’re wondering why I’m bullish on $CRCL and Stablecoins. 8605 subscribers at $1.00: -> $1595. Not even including int. like Canada paying 46% more (2 CAD vs $1 USD subscription) and the FX/rounding disappearing into the void. I’m not here for subscription revenue so I don’t plan on changing anything. But just found this pretty amusing even if you factored in pro rata or holds/delays. You would reduce 30% App Store fees, Stripe card TX fees, and other black box fee mechanisms like foreign currency rounding. Stablecoins are definitely the future, and you can already see banks trying to control it with Clarity Act lobbying.
-
认为不是在替 SOFI CEO 站台，而是在支持散户。
@FinDataByLig 我是在替散户投资者着想，不是替 $SOFI CEO 的口袋着想。 不过如果他们把所有竞争都挡掉，那对 SOFI 大体上确实是利好，但你也就只能接受那种很差的利率了。
英文原文
@FinDataByLig I’m looking out for retail investors, don’t give a sht about lining up the pockets of $SOFI CEO. But yes if they ban out all the competition, that’s largely bullish for SOFI but enjoy the sht interest rates.
-
批评银行借“保护资金”之名打压加密竞争。
Yields 和 Clarity Act 这事儿已经把虚伪写在脸上了。 银行嘴上说，申请银行牌照有一条路径，但背地里…… 这些同样的银行却在董事会后面游说，阻止任何加密相关公司真正拿到牌照。 看看 Custodia bank 的遭遇就知道了。还有现在所有申请银行执照的加密公司…… 这就等于一边说“去申请纽约 bitlicense 啊”，一边又拖了申请五年。 这个机制就是为了让银行把竞争挡在外面，好继续从利差里榨取散户。 绝不是为了“保护”客户资金。 那些告诉散户另一套说法的银行，其实是在当面撒谎。 我们眼看就要迎来一项对加密货币极具破坏性的法案，被银行游说推动通过。
英文原文
You’re witnessing hypocrisy in plain sight with Yields + Clarity Act. Banks say there’s a pathway to apply for a banking license but behind the scenes… But these same banks are the ones lobbying behind the board to prevent any crypto related companies from actually getting it. Just look at what happened Custodia bank. And all the crypto firms applying for banking charters now… It’s the equivalent of saying “just apply for New York bitlicense” while they been stalling applications for half a decade. This is set in place so banks ban competition so they can continue robbing retail off interest rate spread. Not to “safeguard” customer funds. Banks telling retail users otherwise are lying to your face. We’re about to witness one of the most destructive bills to crypto be passed from Bank lobbying
-
提醒 VELO 受 $500M shelf 影响，虽然有国防合同但稀释很重。
顺手提醒一下 $VELO。 它有一份 5 亿美元的 shelf，用于 ATM / warrants 稀释，相对于它 3.11 亿美元的市值，这个规模结构性上很大。 它也是个受散户 X 关注的热门票，之前大家在炒 SpaceX、Andruil 和国防供应链。 包括： - 来自战争部的 3260 万美元 - 来自国防主承包商的 1150 万美元 - 来自 DLA 的 980 万美元 这些合同最近都拿到了（对公司总体上是利好）。 他们说这笔稀释是为了“在未来十年扩建 400 套生产系统”以及并购。 不过我确实觉得相对于市值来说，这个金额还是挺掠夺性的，尤其是 ATM 的情况下。 我之前提到过，$VELO 这家公司战略上可能是对的，但从财务角度看就没那么好了，而这本身就是一个必须时刻考虑的重大风险。 不过如果你还在持有，了解一下这个过hang 风险也很重要。 只是标准风险披露一下，因为它是个很受欢迎的名字。
英文原文
Just a heads up to $VELO. There was a $500M shelf for an ATM / Warrants dilution, which is structurally large relative to its $311m MC. This was a popular retail X stock for speculated SpaceX, Andruil, and Defense supply chains: With: - $32.6M from Department of War - $11.5M from Defense Primes - $9.8M from DLA Contracts all recently (largely positive for the company). They announced the dilution was for "scaling 400 production systems over the next decade" as well as M&A. However, I do think this amount relative to MC is pretty predatory, especially with ATMs. I mentioned earlier companies like $VELO can be strategically sound, but financially, not as much so when I covered the stock earlier. And this is a material risk to always consider. But, it's good to understand overhang risk if you're still long. Just a standard heads up risk disclosure since this is a popular name.
-
强调美国要通过供应链武器化赢得对华竞争，而不是破坏盟友供应链。
我真的是 X 上最“美国优先”的人之一……我不可能是唯一一个意识到，对华冷战的关键在于供应链武器化的人。 但你们现在却把我们自己友好的供应链搞炸了……还把我们自己重要的关系也炸掉了。 比如加拿大，以前是我们的金毛猎犬，负责把一堆稀缺资源带回美国。 结果特朗普把这只狗狗直接丢到荒野里，让它自生自灭……这到底有什么道理？ 我们不需要对 Buddy 这只金毛施加更多杠杆。
英文原文
I'm literally one of the most America first people on X... I can't be the only person who realizes the key to winning the cold war with China is through supply chain weaponization. But you just blew up our on friendly supply chains... and nuked our own important relationships. Canada for example was our Golden Retriever fetching a bunch of precious resources back to America. Then Trump just sent our doggo off into the wilderness to fend for itself... for no sane reason? We don't need more leverage over Buddy, the golden retriever.
-
认为美国应先稳固盟友供应链，再统一武器化对抗中俄。
到底是谁在写这些东西？ 我们不需要对日本、欧洲或韩国这些盟友施加更多杠杆。 我们需要把杠杆用在俄罗斯和中国身上。 - 在东南亚，老挝超过 40% 的加油站已经关闭， - 柬埔寨和泰国已经开始限量和价格管制， - 印度、巴基斯坦和孟加拉都在面对价格上涨和紧急节约， - 韩国 / 日本仍然暴露在供应中断风险里。 中国现在完全可以从俄罗斯拿石油，而俄罗斯的出口管制还被解除了…… 而中国现在的做法就像一战时美国那样在做军火商。 为什么我们要为了帮助俄罗斯 / 以色列，反过来搞砸我们自己的供应链？ 他们之所以叫盟友是有原因的，我们不需要再对他们施加更多杠杆。 如果你真想把这套东西武器化： -> 先确保自己的供应链，先把资金投到越南 / 南美等地的稀土和前驱材料上 -> 再把资金投到韩国 / 日本 / 加拿大 / 美国的精炼加工上 -> 先在委内瑞拉开发原油 / 加工能力 -> 再建立替代贸易路线： 这至少要 3-5 年。 然后你才可以去轰炸什么、去威胁欧洲的 $ASML、日本的 $ARM、美国的 $NVDA、台湾的 $TSM 这类对中国 / 俄罗斯的瓶颈。 总之： 美国优先依赖于： - 在泰国做好自身组装供应链， - 在韩国做好半导体， - 在日本做好化工， - 在台湾做好晶圆代工， - 在加拿大做好稀土， - 在欧洲做好高端设备， 还有其他环节，来让美国更强。 然后再把这一切统一武器化去对付我们的敌人。 你不能一边把我们自己的供应链和全球关系全炸了，一边又说美国正在变得更强大吧？
英文原文
Who is even writing this? We don't need more leverage over our allies like Japan, Europe, or South Korea. We need them over Russia and China. - In SEA over 40% of gas stations in Laos have closed, - Cambodia and Thailand have started rationing and price controls - India, Pakistan and Bangladesh face rising prices and emergency conservation - SK/Japan remain exposed to disruptions. China can get just get their oil from Russia. And Russia got their export control removed... And China is playing arms dealer like what US did in WW1 right now. Why are we screwing over our own supply chains to help Russia/Israel out? They're called allies for a reason, and we don't need more leverage over them. If you really wanted to weaponize this: -> Secure supply chains first, pour funding into rare earths/precursors like Vietnam/South America and other places. -> Pour funding into refinery processing from SK/Japan/Canada/US -> Develop crude/processing in Venezuela First -> Build out alternative trade route: Which will take 3-5 years min. Then you can go blowing stuff up then go threatening European $ASML, Japanese $ARM, US $NVDA, Taiwan $TSM type chokepoints over China/Russia all together. Again: America First relies on: -securing own supply chains in Assembly Thailand, -Semiconductors in South Korea, -Chemical from Japan, -Foundries in Taiwan, -Rare Earths from Canada, - high-end equipment from Europe and others to make United States stronger. Then you weaponize that all together against our enemies. You can't just blow OUR OWN SUPPLY CHAINS and Relations around the world up then say America is becoming more dominant?
-
说 Jim Cramer 看多基本等于反向信号。
@IanCutress Jim Cramer 一看多，基本就等于死讯。
英文原文
@IanCutress Jim Cramer being bullish is basically the kiss of death
-
批评 0DTE 亏光故事，强调要学会长期复利而不是一日赌局。
$RDDT 现在最火的故事就是这个： -> 有人拿着 30 万美元起步 -> 在 2025 年 4 月底部靠个股运气赚到了钱 -> 账户做到了 300 万美元，还说自己实现了财务自由 -> 然后拿去玩 $SPY 的 0DTE 期权 -> 最后把 300 万变成了 5 万。 通常我会讲一个吸取教训的故事，但这次真的只是蠢。 真心别再碰 0dte 期权了。 就算他把钱全仓押到 Jim Cramer 最喜欢的股票 $MRVL，上几年也许都能变成 600 万。 世代财富最好的教训是看看 Nancy Pelosi。 如果你真要做期权，就看看他们怎么在 $AVGO 到 $NVDA 上长期复利。 不是玩一天的窗口。
英文原文
The most viral story on $RDDT right now: -> Guy started with $300,000 -> Gets lucky with individual names at April 2025 bottom -> Runs it up to $3,000,000 and claims they had financial freedom -> Proceeds to do 0DTE options on $SPY -> Turned $3M -> $50k. Usually I give a lesson learned type story but this is just stupid? Legit stop touching 0dte options. Even if they full ported it into Jim Cramer’s favorite stock $MRVL, probably would have been $6M in 2-3 years. The best lesson of generational wealth is looking at Nancy Pelosi. If you do options, look at how their on $AVGO to $NVDA keep compounding over time. Not one day windows.