· 供应链分析
涉及标的： $MRVL
相关概念： CPO 共封装光学
假设 Celestial（$MRVL 的收购标的）是上市公司。其估值在美国市场可能会是天价（我猜约 60-100 亿美元）。因为 2028 年营收预测为 5 亿美元（Q4 年化运行率），2029 年营收预测为 10 亿美元。而且 Celestial 是超大规模数据中心共封装光学(CPO) 计划的核心部分。Celestial 的 2026 年 Q2 财报会是：- 营收接近 0（Marvell 称“自收购以来的营收和利润并不重大”）- 每季度亏损 1250 万美元（每年 5000 万美元）。那些懂行的、关注资格认证周期(qualification cycle) 玩家的人会怎么说... 1. 基于 Celestial 的 Q2 市销率(P/S) 且因为它每季度亏损 1250 万美元... 说它是一只毫无价值的 meme 股？还是 2. 鉴于 2028 年 CPO 超大规模数据中心的机会，它应该被估值 60-100 亿美元？我认为这是美/欧文化 + 市场之间的核心文化分歧。如果你知道如何评估资格认证周期玩家，哪个数字才真正重要？我认为毫无疑问是后者。
Imagine Celestial ($MRVL acquisition) was public. The valuation would probably be astronomical in US markets (if I had to guess, $6-10B) Because 2028 revenue projections were $500m (q4 annualized runrate), 2029 revenue projections were $1B. And because Celestial is a core part of hyperscaler CPO programs. Celestial's 2026 Q2 earnings would have been: - Close to $0 revenue (Marvell said "revenue and earnings since the acquisition were not material") - Losing -$12.5M/quarter ($50M/year) Would people who knew what they were talking about looking at qualification cycle players say... 1. based on Celestial's Q2 P/S numbers and because it was losing -$12.5M a quarter... That it's a worthless meme stock? Or 2. with CPO hyperscaler opportunities for 2028, it should be valued at $6-10B? And I think that's a core cultural disagreement between US / EU cultures + markets. If you knew how to evaluate qualification cycle players, which number actually matters? I'd argue overwhelmingly the latter.