The session opened with striking contrasts between non-tech holdings and the broad technology sector. Despite severe market turmoil, specific consumer and financial picks saw substantial gains. The Cheesecake Factory climbed another 7%, bringing the public portfolio's position to $235,000. RH (Restoration Hardware) continued a rapid upward trajectory, gaining 21.5% in roughly a month since the position was initiated. Meanwhile, SoFi gained nearly 3% during the day, extending total gains on that position to over 90%.
```
"If all else fails and all tech stocks fail and the whole AI trade fails, hey, at least we have The Cheesecake Factory."
```
However, the gains in select names were completely overshadowed by historic sell-offs across major tech firms. Alphabet (Google) suffered what the speaker characterized as its worst single-day trading session in its two decades as a public company, dropping the speaker's remaining $62,000 position by $8,700 on the day (though it remains up 79% overall following earlier profit-taking). Software and enterprise names fared even worse: ServiceNow collapsed 27% during regular hours and slid further in after-hours trading.
---
[02:05](https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1Xixv6REie?t=125s) The Tech Earnings Carnage and Video Roadmap
The post-earnings tech damage expanded across hardware, cloud, and semiconductor giants. Intel dropped 3.6% in regular trading before cratering an additional 23% after hours following disastrous quarterly numbers. Amazon was swept downward in sympathy with Google, falling 4% during the regular session and shedding another 7% or more in after-hours trading following its own earnings release.
```
"So if we got Google having its worst day ever, we got ServiceNow having its worst day ever, hey, if you survived today, you won."
```
With tech stocks tumbling across the board—including Meta, Amazon, Google, ServiceNow, and Intel—investors are anxious about whether Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) will face a similar fate when it reports earnings the following week. In response, the video lays out a comprehensive breakdown:
- Analyzing Amazon's earnings, evaluating short-term weakness versus long-term setup, and reacting to Wall Street commentary.
- Assessing Intel’s 23% post-market collapse and evaluating its direct competitive implications for AMD ahead of AMD's earnings.
- Reviewing Google's valuation and evaluating whether the sell-off presents a premier buying opportunity.
- Disclosing personal portfolio moves, including completely exiting one stock to reallocate capital into other positions.
- Reacting to *The Big Short* investor Steve Eisman's comments regarding sharp slowdowns in Anthropic's revenue growth.
---
[04:45](https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1Xixv6REie?t=285s) 1000X Stocks Announcement and Practical Investing Realities
Before detailing Amazon's financials, the host addressed the upcoming annual promotional sale for the 1000xstocks.com platform, noting that the full product suite discount would launch within 48 hours. Addressing viewers candidly, the host advised that while the service provides an all-in-one institutional-grade research dashboard designed to replace fragmented tools, retail investors working with tighter capital should avoid paid tools. Instead, they can utilize free resources and manual spreadsheets to evaluate fundamentals, just as the host did early in his investing career.
---
[05:43](https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1Xixv6REie?t=343s) Amazon Earnings Deep Dive: 2% Product Sales Growth and Consumer Weakness
Examining Amazon's quarterly income statement revealed severe sluggishness in consumer retail demand. The most alarming metric was net product sales, which rose just 2% year-over-year. While bulls might attempt to point toward shifting promotional dates or Prime Day timing, such an anemic rate points directly to broad consumer weakness, pressured by high fuel prices and soaring utility bills.
```
"At the end of the day, a 2% number is a 2% number, and I don't think this reflects as negatively on Amazon as it maybe reflects on weakness in the consumer."
```
In contrast, Amazon Web Services (AWS) and service-related units carried top-line expansion, lifting net service sales by 19% year-over-year. This pushed total net sales to a 12% increase. While 12% top-line growth is acceptable, it remains below Amazon's optimal target range of 14% to 17%. Furthermore, fulfillment expenses increased 8%, outpacing the 2% growth in physical product sales—an operational mismatch exacerbated by elevated transportation and logistics costs.
[07:54](https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1Xixv6REie?t=474s) OpEx Discipline vs. The Massive 214% Surge in Interest Expense
On the operating expense side, Amazon managed discipline across several line items:
- Cost of sales rose 7%, keeping pace with operational volume.
- Technology and infrastructure expenditures surged 20% year-over-year, reflecting heavy AI and data center deployments.
- General and administrative (G&A) expenses declined by 6%.
- Operating expenses benefited from the absence of a one-off ~$2.8 billion expense incurred in the prior-year period, holding overall operating expense growth to 7%.
Because total net sales grew 12% against a 7% rise in total operating costs, Amazon generated operating leverage, resulting in a 61% year-over-year surge in operating income.
However, non-operating costs revealed the hidden cost of the ongoing AI infrastructure race. While interest income grew 8%, Amazon's interest expense spiked by 214%, skyrocketing from $538 million in the prior-year quarter to nearly $1.7 billion. Because hyperscalers are exhausting their operational cash flows to construct AI clusters and data centers, they must fund ongoing CapEx by drawing down cash balances or issuing debt. Taking on billions in fresh debt at prevailing rates imposes severe recurring interest burdens, which directly compressed bottom-line performance. Consequently, pre-tax income dropped 5% year-over-year, further impacted by a swing from a $10 billion positive non-operating income figure in the prior year to a $703 million net expense in the current period.
```mermaid
flowchart LR
accTitle: AI Data Center CapEx Financing Cycle
accDescr: Flowchart showing how massive AI data center CapEx forces debt issuance and inflates interest expense.
subgraph CapExCycle["Hyperscaler AI Capital Allocation"]
OCF["Depleted Operating<br/>Free Cash Flow"] --> BDC["Draw Down<br/>Balance Sheet Cash"]
BDC --> Debt["Debt Issuance /<br/>Borrowing"]
Debt --> IntExp["Interest Expense<br/>Explosion: +214%<br/>($538M to ~$1.7B)"]
end
IntExp --> PreTax["Pre-Tax Income Compression<br/>(-5% YoY)"]
```
虽然亚马逊的稀释每股收益（diluted EPS）看起来有所下滑，但很大程度上是因为去年的基数被特定因素推高，导致今年的对比显得尤为难看；若剔除一次性因素，其每股收益与净利润的增长其实依然强劲。因此，主讲人给这份财报打出了整体“B”级的评分。不过，财报中也隐藏着令人担忧的成本结构：利息支出（interest expense）持续攀升，让人不得不怀疑两三年后会膨胀到何种程度；此外，履约成本（fulfillment）同比增长 8%，远超净产品销售仅 2% 的微弱增幅，而技术与基础设施成本（technology and infrastructure）更是大涨 20%，完全跑赢了各项收入的增速。
在投资价值方面，主讲人坚定认为亚马逊依然是必须持有的核心资产，直言：“Amazon's always a buy I tell you guys all the time it's always a buy every single correction crash in Amazon stock it's a buy it's as simple as that it's been that way since this company went public in the 90s it's still like that in 2026.” 尽管未来或许到了 2030 年代、2040 年代甚至 2050 年代的某一天，亚马逊会失去这种吸引力，但绝不是今天或明天。随着财报公布后股价下挫，亚马逊的远期市盈率（forward P/E）预计将回落至 19 倍左右。对于这样一家具备庞大长期成长空间的企业而言，估值跌破 20 倍简直是不可多得的抄底良机（steal deal）。短线走势虽然不可预测——股价可能跌至 195 美元、200 美元，也可能涨至 233 美元或 280 美元——但在未来 5 到 15 年的维度上，新生代消费者的网购习惯以及 AWS 云计算业务的持续普及，决定了它应当在每位投资者的投资组合中稳居前三大重仓股之列。
这种表态直接引爆了投资界对自由现金流（Free Cash Flow）断崖式下滑的恐慌。主讲人强调，自己在频道中早已多次预警，市场终有一天会对失控的资本开支掀桌子（throw a fit），只是时间早晚的问题。在接下来的 12 到 24 个月里，这些科技巨头的自由现金流状况只会变得更加恶化。
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: Capital Expenditure Impact on Big Tech and Suppliers
accDescr: Massive CapEx growth drives AI infrastructure but crushes short-term free cash flow for hyperscalers while benefiting chip suppliers like AMD.
subgraph Hyperscalers["科技巨头（亚马逊、谷歌）"]
direction TB
A["2027 年 CapEx 激增<br/>（规模或达 3,000 亿美元）"] --> B["自由现金流（FCF）承压恶化"]
B --> C["华尔街短期恐慌抛售<br/>科技股股价下挫"]
end
subgraph Beneficiaries["芯片与算力供应链"]
direction TB
A -->|"巨额基建采购采购订单"| D["AMD 等算力供应商受益"]
D --> E["数据中心算力芯片收入爆发"]
end
```
巨额的资本开支虽然压制了科技巨头自身的自由现金流，却给半导体供应链带来了巨大生机。主讲人特别提醒 AMD 的股东：“AMD shareholders listen. AMD shareholders. This is good news. Okay. This is what we want to see. We want to see these companies continue to up CapEx.”
在电视媒体访谈中，华尔街分析师拆解了亚马逊的零售与广告基本盘。尽管零售端看似疲软，但主要是因为 Prime Day 促销活动移至第三季度，直接拖累了第二季度约 400 个基点的营收增速，其底层零售表现依然坚挺。财报中最亮眼的指标是北美地区营业利润率（North American operating profit）攀升至 7.7%，大幅超出市场预期的 6%。驱动利润率扩张的幕后功臣正是利润率极高的广告业务。分析师指出，广告业务与零售生态深度绑定，目前仍处于“早期发展阶段”（early innings），但未来也面临着代理型智能体购物（agentic shopping）带来的外部生态分流挑战，因为亚马逊并未直接接入诸如 ChatGPT 等第三方大模型体系。
听闻分析师将智能体购物与亚马逊生态挂钩时，主讲人当即打断并反驳了市场对语音助手的幻想：“Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, hold on. I'm an Amazon shareholder. It's one of the most important stocks I hold. Definitely a top five position across my portfolio of Lyset. But don't count on Alexa. Just stop it. Just stop it.” 他强调，投资者必须认清现实：消费者真正使用的是手机上的亚马逊 App 和官方网页，从来没有人会指望靠智能音箱 Alexa 来完成日常网购。
[20:00](https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1Xixv6REie?t=1200s) The CapEx Dilemma and Amazon’s Earnings Disappointment
A heated debate unfolds around the massive capital intensity required to fuel current cloud growth targets. Reacting to an analyst's praise that Amazon projecting roughly 40% growth in its cloud business over the next two years is "fairly impressive"—especially given its status as the primary cloud partner for Anthropic—the speaker pushes back aggressively against the idea that such expansion deserves applause on its own merits. Given that hyperscalers are deploying roughly $225 billion in capital expenditures this year and likely exceeding $300 billion next year, outsized growth is the bare minimum requirement to justify the outlay, especially with legacy core e-commerce sales remaining sluggish.
Analyzing the immediate print from Amazon, Jefferies equity research analyst Brent Thill notes that top-line performance came in merely inline, operating income was marginally ahead, but the advertising division hit a visible roadblock. Advertising missed expectations, suggesting brand and agent ad spending hit a temporary "flat tire," while consumer core retail growth arrived at 4.6% (against an expected range of 3% to 5.1%). Coupled with recent mixed prints across Google, market sentiment has entered what Thill characterizes as a "mini timeout" brought on by unrealistic expectations. The host emphasizes that while trading near 10 times forward EBITDA makes Amazon an exceptional bargain for multi-year long-term investors, the next quarter remains anyone's guess.
> "Dude, we're going to spend $225 billion on CapEx this year and another probably 300 billion plus next year. We better freaking be growing like this because the Lord knows that e-commerce business isn't growing strong right now." — Host
- Amazon core retail grew 4.6%, failing to hit the higher end of expectations (3% to 5.1%).
- Hyperscaler industry-wide CapEx is projected to reach $225 billion this year and over $300 billion next year.
- Forward valuation multiple for Amazon is currently pacing around 10 times EBITDA.
---
[22:50](https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1Xixv6REie?t=1370s) Business Model Transitions: Amazon's Advantage Over Meta and Google
The discussion turns to the difficult transition or "bridge" between legacy cash-cow business models and future AI-driven ecosystems. While Google faces heightened scrutiny over whether its core search and advertising engine can sustain the transition to generative search results, Amazon's structural composition gives it a distinct operational edge over ad-dependent peers like Meta and Alphabet. Meta and Google built the world's most lucrative businesses around free, highly addictive consumer platforms—Google Search, YouTube, Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp—monetized purely via ultra-high-margin advertising. As those companies pour billions into hardware, infrastructure, and enterprise AI, they are necessarily diluting their historic corporate profit margins.
Amazon, by contrast, has spent decades enduring razor-thin margins in low-margin, high-friction logistics and e-commerce just to secure a dominant market share. Because Amazon is historically accustomed to operating in low-margin environments, its corporate culture and unit economics are well-suited to handle the capital drag of technological pivots. Meanwhile, Amazon Web Services (AWS) operates as the internal profit turbine funding broader initiatives, rather than the consumer retail business propping up the cloud.
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: Business Model Profit Engines Comparison
accDescr: Contrasting Meta and Google's high-margin advertising transition with Amazon's low-margin retail and high-margin AWS engine.
subgraph MetaGoogle["Meta & Alphabet / Google"]
A["Core Ad Platforms\n(Search, YouTube, Meta Apps)"] -->|"Ultra-High Operating Margins"| B["Legacy Profit Engine"]
B -->|"Reinvesting into CapEx"| C["Lower-Margin AI & Hardware\n(Depresses Blended Margins)"]
end
subgraph AmazonModel["Amazon"]
D["Core Retail & Logistics\n(High TAM, Thin Margins)"] -.->|"Decades of Scale"| E["Monopoly-Like Delivery Moat"]
F["AWS Cloud Infrastructure"] -->|"High-Margin Profit Engine"| G["Self-Funding Expansion & Reinvestment"]
end
```
> "Amazon's used to lower margin businesses. This is nothing new for them. So Meta spending all this money and getting into lower margin businesses, it sucks because it's going to bring Meta's margins down longer term." — Host
---
[25:10](https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1Xixv6REie?t=1510s) The Cloud Backlog Paradox and Supply Chain Roadblocks
While cloud demand appears massive on paper, a widening discrepancy has formed between signed contract backlogs and recognized revenue. Last quarter, Amazon's cloud backlog surged by 154%, yet reported revenue growth lingered in the upper 30s rather than breaking higher. Brent Thill explains that enterprise customers and hyperscalers face execution and infrastructure bottlenecks. Data centers cannot be built or powered quickly enough, and complex supply chain constraints prevent companies from turning commitments into active compute capacity. Microsoft experienced similar headwinds, noting that delays left at least one major partner unable to bring up $5 billion of committed workloads.
This conversion lag has polarized investor sentiment across cloud hyperscalers:
- **Microsoft Azure:** Grew roughly 48%, maintaining an operating margin near 50% alongside robust free cash flow generation.
- **Google Cloud:** Doubled revenue, though off a significantly smaller relative baseline, while consolidated free cash flow faced intense CapEx drag.
- **Amazon AWS:** Camped out slightly below the anticipated 40% growth threshold, bringing consolidated top-line growth to 12% and driving a 7% immediate drop in Amazon stock.
> "The real question is, if they're signing contract volume at 154%, why are they not converting revenue faster? These cloud companies and AI companies can't actually convert the contracted backlog to revenue as fast as investors want." — Brent Thill
---
[28:30](https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1Xixv6REie?t=1710s) Microsoft Valuation Model: Bull vs. Base Case
Turning away from the earnings reactions of Google and Amazon, the host transitions to a financial projection for Microsoft, a company rarely modeled on the channel, evaluating whether current prices offer an attractive entry point.
| Valuation Case | Projected Revenue Growth | Projected Net Income Growth | Forward P/E Range | Expected Annual Return (CAGR) |
|:--- |:--- |:--- |:--- |:--- |
| **Bull Case** | ~17% average | Mid-20% range | 24x – 29x | ~20% |
| **Base Case** | ~15% average | ~20% average | 23x – 28x | Mid-teens |
In the bull scenario, Microsoft compounding revenue at 17% paired with a 24 to 29 times earnings multiple produces an estimated 20% compound annual growth rate. In the slightly more conservative base case, revenue growth steps down to 15%, net income expands at 20%, and the multiple compresses slightly to a 23 to 28 range, offering a steady, double-digit total return profile.
> "So bull case assumption, you get about a 20% compound annual growth rate. That's not bad. Now for my base case, I would go a little under that." — Host
[30:00](https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1Xixv6REie?t=1800s) Microsoft Valuation Outlook & The Bear Case Scenario
Evaluating Microsoft ("Mr. Softee"), the base projection indicates a compound annual growth rate in the teens. While advanced projections allow factoring in positive catalysts like share buybacks reducing share count and accelerating earnings per share (EPS), investors must also evaluate a plausible bear case. In that downside scenario, Microsoft might dilute shareholders by issuing additional shares in future years to fund its aggressive capital expenditures.
Assuming a bear-case revenue growth rate averaging around 12% without any meaningful net income expansion, Microsoft's price-to-earnings (P/E) multiple could easily contract into the 15x to 20x range as investors repeatedly worry that growth will slide toward single digits. Under such an outcome, investors would essentially make no money over the next several years. While Microsoft remains a decent long-term hold, it presents a less compelling risk-reward profile than peers like Amazon, Alphabet ("Google McDougal"), or Meta. As the speaker puts it: “I think Microsoft's an okay buy. I do. I don't think it's as good of a buy as, let's say, AmazingZone is, Amazon, or even Google McDougal, or even Meta, but it's a buy.”
- **Projected Base Growth**: Teens compound annual growth rate (CAGR).
- **Bear-Case Assumptions**: ~12% average growth with stagnant net income margins.
- **Bear-Case Multiple**: Contraction to a 15x–20x P/E ratio.
- **Capital Allocation Risk**: Potential future share issuances to finance massive CapEx spending.
---
[31:33](https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1Xixv6REie?t=1893s) Intel's Collapse vs. AMD's Structural Dominance
Intel’s grim earnings report and warnings regarding soft personal computer (PC) demand and elevated memory costs create short-term collateral damage across the semiconductor sector, likely dragging down AMD in immediate trading. However, this weakness is purely temporary and creates a misleading comparison between two vastly different businesses. Intel's persistent decline stems from chronic structural mismanagement; the company essentially required government intervention and an industry-wide spending wave to avoid total insolvency.
In stark contrast, AMD faces no fundamental demand or sales bottlenecks. AMD is positioned to sell every single CPU and GPU it can secure from its foundry partner, TSMC, over the next several years. AMD’s long-term transformation—rallying from a $2 stock up through $200 and onward—has established it as the primary challenger taking sustained market share from Intel while standing as the sole competitor on earth capable of keeping Nvidia on edge. The host pulls no punches regarding Intel's standing: “Intel junk been junk still junk. So, you know, their results is going to pull AMD down in the very, very short term as in probably tomorrow. But don't don't. Assume like, oh, Intel, this means something for AMD. AMD is the real deal, man. Intel's a piece of junk.”
subgraph Intel["Intel (Structurally Impaired)"]
I1["Weak PC Sales & Memory Cost Pressures"] --> I2["Chronic Share Loss & Operational Stagnation"]
I2 --> I3["Reliance on Government Subsidies / CHIPS Act"]
end
subgraph AMD["AMD (Structural Growth)"]
A1["Unconstrained Demand for GPUs & CPUs"] --> A2["TSMC Foundry Allocation Fully Absorbed"]
A2 --> A3["Direct Market Share Gains vs. Intel"]
A3 --> A4["Only Viable Enterprise Counterweight to Nvidia"]
end
I1 -.->|"Spills Negative Sentiment Onto"| A1
```
- **Intel Weakness Factors**: Slowing PC shipment forecasts, memory price headwinds, legacy operational execution failures.
- **AMD Capacity Pipeline**: Unconstrained GPU and CPU end-market demand, limited only by TSMC silicon packaging and supply allocation.
- **Competitive Landscape**: AMD remains the only global semiconductor player providing direct, credible enterprise competition to Nvidia’s AI accelerators.
---
[34:35](https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1Xixv6REie?t=2075s) Google McDougal: The Free Cash Flow Precipice
For long-term investors operating on a multi-year horizon, Alphabet represents a compelling investment; however, shorter-term market participants face substantial risk due to a deteriorating cash profile. Over past cycles, Alphabet accumulated massive mountains of free cash flow, but that trajectory is poised to reverse aggressively as AI infrastructure commitments surge.
The company is heading toward an extended period of deeply negative or depressed free cash flow. Market expectations have not yet priced in the bottom of this spending cycle, with peak financial ugliness still an estimated 18 to 24 months—or roughly six to eight quarters—away before stabilizing. The speaker warns that sentiment will face intense stress as the cash numbers crater: “Like can you imagine a year from now where the free cash flow of Google McDougal is going to be? It's going to be ugly. So we're not even at peak ugliness. We're still at least probably 18 to 24 months from peak ugliness.”
- **Multi-Year Horizon**: Long-term fundamentals remain intact, but short-term entry points carry execution volatility.
- **Free Cash Flow Cliff**: Capital expenditures are set to trigger substantial near-term free cash flow contraction.
- **Trough Timeline**: Estimated 6 to 8 quarters (18–24 months) remaining until capital intensity peaks and free cash flow inflects upward.
---
[36:30](https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1Xixv6REie?t=2190s) Google Earnings Breakdown: Search Slowdown vs. Macro Weakness
A panel reaction to Alphabet’s earnings highlights a divergent print: the Cloud division expanded dramatically, surging 103% year-over-year with operating margins beating Wall Street expectations. However, the core Search business faltered, posting 12% revenue growth against consensus expectations of 15%—a roughly 300 basis point shortfall alongside compressed advertising margins. Analysts point out that Alphabet faced tough year-over-year comparisons and rising competitive anxiety from alternative AI search products, though query volumes paradoxically grew at their fastest quarterly rate in five years.
| Segment / Metric | Performance / Consensus | Context & Market Interpretation |
|:--- |:--- |:--- |
| **Google Cloud** | Up ~103% YoY | Crushed estimates; expanding operating margins. |
| **Google Search Growth** | 12% Actual vs. 15% Expected | ~300 bps miss; lapping tough comparisons from the prior year. |
| **Search Search Margins** | Missed expectations | Sparked fears that AI-integrated search degrades monetization margins. |
| **Query Volume** | 5-Year Record High Growth | Disconnect between total queries processed and advertising dollar monetization. |
The host strongly rejects the consensus narrative that Alphabet's search miss signifies structural obsolescence or market share loss to alternative AI engines. Instead, the weakness reflects a broader, macro-driven consumer and enterprise slowdown visible across various consumer-facing and industrial bellwethers—such as Deckers Brands (Hoka, UGG) trimming full-year revenue guidance, persistent challenges at Nike and Lululemon, Amazon managing a meager 2% net product sales growth, and negative year-over-year revenues across legacy industrials like Whirlpool. When the wider economy contracts marketing budgets, digital ad revenue naturally compresses across the board. The host emphasizes this systemic reality: “I think people are looking at some of these numbers and they're thinking like it's something wrong with the company. It's like, oh, there's something wrong with Google search, blah, blah, blah. No, no, no, no, no, no. It's the economy. It's too many companies that are putting up lackluster revenue numbers for it to be company specific.”
[40:00](https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1Xixv6REie?t=2400s) Google's Search Normalization vs. Cloud Dominance
The panel analyzes Alphabet's positioning following its earnings report, noting that search query growth is expanding at its fastest clip in five years even as ad revenue growth trails Meta by more than half. Advertisers are diversifying into Meta and direct AI model outlets, but the speakers argue that Alphabet's massive base of query volume keeps it well-positioned as a steady incumbent. As one analyst summarizes Alphabet’s core financial profile, “And when you add on top of that the success the company is now having in cloud, you have a business that's growing still 25% with mid 30% margin that now trades under 20 times earnings.” Addressing whether Alphabet lacks dedicated AI agent tooling, the consensus is that Google does not necessarily need to dominate agentic commerce; its primary imperative is successfully transitioning users from static blue-link search queries to dynamic, interactive Gemini surfaces.
The host pauses the external clip to present a comparative chart tracking cloud infrastructure growth rates across the three major hyperscalers. Google Cloud leads the pack with a staggering 103% growth, compared to Microsoft Azure at 48% and Amazon AWS at 39%. The host notes a nuance regarding Google's reporting—namely that Alphabet may bundle its proprietary TPU (Tensor Processing Unit) hardware revenues into Google Cloud figures, potentially inflating the clean growth comparison against rivals. Furthermore, AWS operates from a vastly larger revenue base, making high percentage expansions mathematically harder to sustain. Nevertheless, the center of gravity at Alphabet is visibly reorienting: Sundar Pichai recently announced the company is operating at a half-trillion-dollar annual run rate, and Google Cloud's CEO joined the quarterly earnings call for the very first time. An analyst observes that search has long been the world’s most lucrative model, but notes, “Well if you look at the relative strength of the cloud business is doing significantly better than the search business The search business just happens to have been probably the most dominant business model in the world up until the emergence of AI And so I think this company, you know, the center of gravity is shifting a bit more towards cloud over time as the driving force of the company.”
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: Hyperscaler Cloud Growth Comparison
accDescr: Chart contrasting cloud growth rates and operational focus between Google Cloud, Microsoft Azure, and Amazon AWS.
subgraph GrowthRates["Cloud Infrastructure Growth Rates"]
GC["Google Cloud\n+103% Growth\n(Includes TPU allocation)"]
AZ["Microsoft Azure\n+48% Growth"]
AWS["Amazon AWS\n+39% Growth\n(Significantly larger base)"]
end
subgraph AlphabetPivot["Alphabet Strategic Shift"]
GC --> Pivot["Center of gravity shifts toward Cloud"]
CEO["Cloud CEO joins earnings call for first time"] --> Pivot
RunRate["$500B Annual Run Rate (Sundar Pichai)"] --> Pivot
end
```
- **Alphabet Valuation**: Trading at under 20x forward price-to-earnings, sustaining ~25% overall growth and mid-30% operating margins.
- **Search Query Expansion**: Alphabet logged its fastest query volume increase in five years despite losing marginal ad share to Meta.
- **Hyperscaler Growth Metrics**: Google Cloud grew 103%, Azure grew 48%, and AWS grew 39%.
- **Corporate Milestone**: Sundar Pichai stated Alphabet is tracking at a half-trillion-dollar ($500 billion) annual run rate.
---
[44:15](https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1Xixv6REie?t=2655s) Portfolio Overhaul: Exiting ServiceNow for Celsius, American Express, and Netflix
The host walks viewers through his public brokerage account and shares the recent rebalancing moves he executed, which were earlier detailed in his private subscriber community. He decided to completely liquidate his stake in enterprise software giant ServiceNow. Looking back, he expresses regret over not dumping the entire position during the prior week's market peak when gains were significantly higher, though he still locked in a respectable return across all liquidated lots. Demonstrating his decisive clean break, the host declares, “I sold it all. Service now. I took my profit and I moved out.”
The capital harvested from the ServiceNow exit was immediately redeployed into three aggressive purchases across consumer, payments, and entertainment leaders. He deployed $20,000 into Celsius Holdings at $28 per share, injected $27,000 into American Express at $324 per share, and funneled $28,000 into Netflix at $61.84. Highlighting his updated portfolio balances on screen, the host notes that American Express and Celsius have each expanded into substantial holdings valued near a quarter of a million dollars apiece, while Netflix now sits at just under $180,000. He describes these three names as his primary conviction focuses within his public portfolio, expressing strong confidence that all three will deliver handsome compounding returns over the next three years.
- **ServiceNow Sale**: Complete liquidation of the position to realize remaining profits.
- **Celsius Holdings ($CELH)**: $20,000 buy executed at $28.00 per share; overall position now near $250,000.
- **American Express ($AXP)**: $27,000 buy executed at $324.00 per share; overall position now near $250,000.
- **Netflix ($NFLX)**: $28,000 buy executed at $61.84 per share; position size now just under $180,000.
---
[46:15](https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1Xixv6REie?t=2775s) CEO Trust and Competitive Moats: Why Salesforce Trumps ServiceNow
Reflecting on why he parted ways with ServiceNow, the host explains that while he does not believe the company is in financial peril or destined for insolvency, the risk-reward profile has deteriorated. He expresses skepticism toward ServiceNow CEO Bill McDermott’s pitch that near-term enterprise spending will convert into vast corporate token consumption down the road. In the host's view, ServiceNow talks an aggressive game, but the actual top-line revenue growth rates fail to match the executive enthusiasm, leaving too many fundamental question marks for long-term holders.
This dynamic comes down to a direct comparison between ServiceNow and his heavyweight holding in Salesforce, two enterprise software suites locked in fierce head-to-head competition. The host emphasizes that navigating macro uncertainty and structural platform shifts requires total faith in executive leadership, and he favors Marc Benioff over Bill McDermott. Pointing out this divergence, the host states, “I think Benioff's a better CEO than Bill McDermott is. And so I've got to bet on, especially when you're going into uncharted waters, you've got to really bet on the CEO you trust more.” He finds Salesforce’s business model sturdier and feels considerably safer leaving his capital parked in Salesforce, declaring, “I feel like Salesforce will outperform service now over the next three to five years.”
- **Executive Execution**: Host expresses higher trust in Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff compared to ServiceNow CEO Bill McDermott during technological transitions.
- **Revenue Delivery**: ServiceNow's reported revenue growth has not supported its expansive narrative around corporate token consumption.
- **Capital Allocation Thesis**: Capital reallocation is motivated by higher safety and expected relative outperformance from Salesforce over a 3-to-5-year horizon.
---
[47:15](https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1Xixv6REie?t=2835s) Steve Eisman on AI Regulatory Capture and the Myth of Sentience
The discussion transitions to a televised interview with noted investor Steve Eisman, who delivers a scathing critique of the artificial intelligence narrative promoted by leading frontier lab executives. The interviewer prompts Eisman on his assertion that the public warnings issued by Anthropic's Dario Amodei and OpenAI's Sam Altman regarding existential threats to humanity are fundamentally disingenuous ploys to construct artificial moats around proprietary models. The interviewer asks directly if these apocalyptic warnings are purely self-serving tactics designed to block open-source model proliferation.
Eisman confirms his stance, stating that his private assessment is even stronger than calling it a simple lie. He argues that tech leaders deliberately manufacture moral panic to provoke government intervention that they can subsequently co-opt. Eisman asserts, “Look, I just think, that what they're trying to do is create hysteria so that The industry will become regulated.” According to Eisman, the endgame of this regulatory push is erecting legal barriers that exclude foreign open-weight architectures, specifically Chinese models, from domestic markets.
Dismissing the idea that current AI architectures possess consciousness, Eisman compares the present state of generative AI to a simple firecracker rather than a hydrogen bomb. He explains that large language models are merely statistical next-word predictors: when asked a query such as why the Roman Empire collapsed, the model traverses an established associative chain, determines the highest-probability following token, cycles back through the sequence, and repeats the routine. Defining current artificial intelligence, Eisman remarks, “Actually, the way I would put it is it's a very complicated word retrieval model.” He rejects the idea that these iterative token predictors are sentient or even on the immediate verge of sentience.
- **Regulatory Capture Thesis**: Eisman contends that frontier AI labs weaponize existential risk narratives to invite regulations designed to ban Chinese open-weight models.
- **Evolutionary Stage**: Eisman characterizes modern generative models as the technological equivalent of a "firecracker," not a "hydrogen bomb."
- **Model Mechanics**: Current generative systems are defined as token-by-token word retrieval and next-token prediction loops rather than conscious cognitive agents.
[50:00](https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1Xixv6REie?t=3000s) Regulatory Capture vs. Delusional Belief: Science Fiction and AI Risk
The discussion centers around a clip debating whether tech leaders' constant warnings about artificial intelligence risks are a calculated maneuver for regulatory capture or born out of genuine conviction. One speaker points out historical consistency, noting that Sam Altman and Elon Musk were discussing existential AI risks in joint interviews as early as 2015 prior to founding OpenAI, Dario Amodei was raising identical flags in 2017 before Anthropic existed, and Demis Hassabis was sounding alarms at DeepMind as far back as 2012. While conceding that the practical outcome of these warnings could create protective regulatory capture, the speaker questions whether their long-standing motivation can be dismissed as a sudden, hypocritical ploy once they attained power.
The counterargument frames the entire mindset as a product of overactive imagination and human psychology rather than cold calculation. The respondent argues that these executives have simply read too much science fiction and have convinced themselves of their own narrative. To illustrate the psychological state, an analogy is drawn to an overly ambitious father who pours all his money, time, and resources into his child's athletic training because he firmly believes the kid is destined to become the greatest tennis player, golfer, or football star of all time. That almost delusional level of belief is viewed as necessary just to attempt to turn such massive visions into reality. However, another participant forcefully pushes back against attributing any sincerity to them, asserting that waking them up at 3:00 AM would reveal they know AI is nowhere close to that reality.
> “I think that if you really would wake them up at 3 o'clock in the morning, they would say we're not even close. This is nonsense. Nonsense. That's what I sincerely believe. I don't believe a word that comes out of their mouths. Not one word.”
- **Historical AI safety discourse**: Sam Altman and Elon Musk warned about AI risks in 2015 interviews; Dario Amodei in 2017; Demis Hassabis at DeepMind in 2012.
- **Psychological dynamic**: Founders develop an irrational, obsessive conviction in their project's world-altering potential, akin to sports parents investing everything into an athletic prodigy.
- **Skepticism of stated motives**: Critics believe the apocalyptic warnings are fundamentally disconnected from the technology's actual current capabilities.
---
[52:30](https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1Xixv6REie?t=3150s) CEO Trustworthiness and the Lack of AI Moats
The host reacts directly to the clip, siding entirely with the skepticism expressed by Steve Eisman regarding AI industry leaders. The host expresses deep personal suspicion toward OpenAI's Sam Altman and Anthropic's Dario Amodei, remarking that despite the public's historical wariness toward Meta's Mark Zuckerberg, Zuckerberg still feels noticeably more trustworthy than Altman or Amodei. In contrast to these AI figures, corporate leaders like Jeff Bezos, current Amazon CEO Andy Jassy, and AMD CEO Lisa Su are highlighted as genuine "straight shooters" who present business realities plainly and reliably.
The conversation turns to the fragility of the entire AI commercial stack and the fundamental lack of a sustainable competitive moat. The host references the analogy that using bleeding-edge frontier models for basic commercial tasks is like requiring a Mercedes G-Wagon simply to drive down the street to the supermarket. With commoditization looming and models racing to the bottom, the entire supply chain—running from Nvidia's hardware through cloud hyperscalers down to foundation model developers like OpenAI and Anthropic—remains precariously dependent on the financial viability and business models of these frontier labs.
```mermaid
flowchart TD
accTitle: AI Industry Value Chain Dependency
accDescr: Diagram showing the fragile chain of revenue flow and dependency from semiconductor hardware to foundation model startups.
subgraph Hardware ["Hardware Layer"]
NVDA["Nvidia"]
end
subgraph Infrastructure ["Cloud Infrastructure"]
HS["Hyperscalers (AWS / Google Cloud / Azure)"]
end
subgraph FoundationModels ["Frontier Model Labs"]
OAI["OpenAI"]
ANT["Anthropic"]
end
> “I actually agree 100% with Steve Eisman here. I don't know what it is, but I wouldn't trust anything they say.”
- **Executive credibility ranking**:
- *Questionable / Untrusted*: Sam Altman (OpenAI), Dario Amodei (Anthropic).
- *Relatively more trusted*: Mark Zuckerberg (Meta).
- *High-trust "straight shooters"*: Jeff Bezos (Amazon founder), Andy Jassy (Amazon CEO), Lisa Su (AMD CEO).
- **The "G-Wagon" problem**: Over-engineered frontier compute is frequently being sold for trivial consumer tasks that do not justify the underlying capital expenditure.
- **Systemic risk**: The financial health of hyperscalers and Nvidia remains tied to the solvency and shaky monetization models of OpenAI and Anthropic.
---
[55:00](https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1Xixv6REie?t=3300s) The Social Network Analogy, Digital Hype, and Closing Thoughts
The final segment dissects how regulatory appeals are weaponized to build corporate moats under the guise of national security and protectionism, specifically aiming to shut out Chinese competition. The host connects this tech evangelism to David Fincher's film *The Social Network*. In the movie, the depiction of Mark Zuckerberg founding Facebook includes grand declarations about how humanity will eventually live on the internet and digital interaction will replace physical reality. While the modern world indeed spends substantial portions of life online, the host observes that physical reality, family, and in-person connection never vanished as the tech visionaries predicted; people are not simply spending their days wearing goggles in a fabricated universe.
The host emphasizes that while founders naturally hype their products and believe their own mythologies, investors must recognize that only a fraction of what they claim ever comes true, while much of it is pure exaggeration. Concluding the stream, the host thanks viewers for their support and subscriptions, reminding the audience of an upcoming "massive 1000X sale" scheduled to launch in less than two days, accessible via a pinned link in the comments where viewers can register to receive the deal as soon as it drops.
> “So at the end of the day, like, you know, with those guys, they're going to believe in their product and service and you know, some of what they say is going to be true and a lot's not going to be true.”
- **Regulation as a moat**: Regulatory appeals by AI leaders serve to restrict open-source proliferation and block external Chinese competitors from entering the domestic market.
- **The digital vs. physical reality gap**: Extreme technological narratives—from early social media claims of replacing physical life to current VR/AI utopias—routinely overestimate real-world adoption and underestimate human attachment to physical life.
- **Closing promotion**: Announcement of a major promotional sale launching within 48 hours via a pinned comment link.
## Notable quotes
> [25:10](https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1Xixv6REie?t=1510s) These cloud companies and AI companies can't actually convert the contracted backlog to revenue as fast as investors want. — Brent Thill
> [22:50](https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1Xixv6REie?t=1370s) Amazon's used to lower margin businesses. This is nothing new for them. So Meta spending all this money and getting into lower margin businesses, it sucks because it's going to bring Meta's margins down longer term. — Host
## Mentioned
亚马逊 (Amazon), 谷歌 (Alphabet / Google), 英特尔 (Intel), AMD (Advanced Micro Devices), 微软 (Microsoft), Meta, ServiceNow, Salesforce, 美国运通 (American Express), Celsius Holdings, 奈飞 (Netflix), The Cheesecake Factory, RH (Restoration Hardware), SoFi, 台积电 (TSMC), 英伟达 (Nvidia), OpenAI, Anthropic, DeepMind, AWS (Amazon Web Services), Azure, Google Cloud, Steve Eisman, Brent Thill, Bill McDermott, Marc Benioff, Sam Altman, Dario Amodei, Sundar Pichai, Andy Jassy, Lisa Su, Mark Zuckerberg, 《社交网络》(The Social Network)
## Video description
【Financial Education】
科技巨头财报集体跳水，亚马逊与谷歌还能抄底吗？
I Sold it all
｜科技巨头财报集体跳水
近期美股科技板块遭遇重挫，Service Now 单日暴跌 27%，Intel 在盘后交易中进一步下挫 23%。亚马逊与谷歌虽在财报中展现了云业务的增长，但市场对高额资本开支带来的利润压力感到担忧。亚马逊净产品销售额仅增长 2%，远低于预期，尽管 AWS 业务保持了 19% 的增长，但整体业绩未能达到投资者的高标准。目前市场处于短期回调期，投资者对科技巨头在 AI 领域的投入产出比产生了质疑。
｜亚马逊与谷歌的估值逻辑
亚马逊目前的远期市盈率预计在 19 倍左右，从长期价值投资的角度看，处于被低估区间。尽管短期内资本开支激增可能影响自由现金流，但 AWS 作为核心利润引擎，未来两年的增长预期依然强劲。谷歌同样面临搜索业务增长放缓的挑战，且 AI 投入导致自由现金流短期承压。不过，考虑到云业务的扩张速度，长期来看这些巨头仍具备较强的护城河，目前的股价回调更多是市场对短期执行力的失望。
｜半导体行业的连锁反应
Intel 的疲软业绩对 AMD 构成了直接利空，市场担忧 PC 市场需求放缓及存储价格波动。然而，AMD 在高性能计算领域的市场份额持续扩张，且在 GPU 和 CPU 供应端具备较强动能。相比于 Intel 的增长乏力，AMD 在 AI 算力竞争中处于更有利的地位。投资者应区分对待，Intel 的困境更多是公司自身经营问题，而 AMD 依然是能够挑战行业龙头的核心标的。
｜AI 监管背后的利益博弈
科技大佬们频繁提及 AI 风险并呼吁监管，其本质可能是为了通过构建合规门槛来巩固自身护城河，防止开源模型及外部竞争对手进入。这种所谓的风险叙事，更像是为了争取政策倾斜。对于普通投资者而言，不必过度沉迷于这些关于 AI 毁灭人类的言论，应回归商业本质，关注公司的实际盈利能力与市场份额，而非被大佬们的公关辞令所误导。
[25:10] Brent Thill: These cloud companies and AI companies can't actually convert the contracted backlog to revenue as fast as investors want.
[22:50] Host: Amazon's used to lower margin businesses. This is nothing new for them. So Meta spending all this money and getting into lower margin businesses, it sucks because it's going to bring Meta's margins down longer term.
Original transcript
[0:00] These are very busy, very serious times we have here ladies and gentlemen, but I need you to do one thing for me before we get rolling here today. I need you to say it with me. Cheesecake Factory, look at that baby. Another 7% up here today, now $235,000 in this position in the public account. If all else fails and all tech stocks fail and the whole AI trade fails, hey, at least we have... The Cheesecake Factory. That's the one stock. And we got another one. RH. Somebody said in the comments on yesterday's main channel video, they said RH stands for Red Hot. And I think they're right. Look at this stock. We just started buying this one like very recently and already up 21.5%. Like you would be flipping my flapjacks. We just started buying this one literally the last month. Like insane how hot this stock is right now, right? Speaking about hot stocks, SoFi so high. Look at this one. Continues to climb up almost another 3% here today. Congratulations, SoFi shareholders. Now up over 90% on this position. But that's where the party ends. Because after that, it just gets rough. Google McDougal. Worst day ever. Ever today. That company's been public for like two decades. Worst day ever. ever today. Unbelievable, right? We're still at 79% in the public account. Obviously, I took most of my profits on Google. When was that? But I took most of my profits on Google a while back. But I still hold a decent amount of shares. It's still a $62,000 position. And so it's still a big downward move here to $8,700 right there on good old Google McDougal. Service now had its worst day today. Ever here today. Worst day ever. So if we got Google having its worst day ever. We got ServiceNow having its worst day ever. Hey, if you survived today... You won. You won. That's all I got to say. Look at this. Serve is now down 27% here today. "and it's down more after hours." Like it's like, "Yo, wasn't that enough? "Wasn't that enough damage, 27% a day?" And it's like, "Nah, we're going down more after hours." Look at Intel. Intel, this stock was already down big today. It was down 3.6%. It's down another 23%. It's down on Michael Jordan after hours. Oh my gosh. You'll be flipping my flapjacks on the floor and right into the dumpster. it's unbelievable right Amazing zone. This stock got hammered here today. Obviously, Google going down, having his worst day ever. So that brought Amazon down. And guess what? It wasn't enough. It was down 4% in the trading session, down another 7% plus after hours. Okay, so we have so much to get into in this video here today, okay? We'll talk Amazon right off the top. Is this a great buying opportunity? Is this stock going to remain weak in the short term? What's a long-term setup? We'll get into Amazon all at the front of this video, and I'll talk in depth about that. From there, I want to react to Wall Streeters speaking about Amazon and give my opinion and perspective versus kind of what these Wall Streeters are talking about in regards to Amazon. From there, we'll talk about Intel in relation to AMD. So Intel, 23% down. You know that's going to hammer AMD. So we'll talk about how much this matters for AMD. We know AMD earnings are coming next week. Are we about to witness AMD stock crash next week? company that's coming out with their earnings is crashing, right? They're like meta, Amazon, Google, ServiceNow. Like you just run through a whole list of them. Intel. And now it's like, oh, yeah. AMD next week AMD next week. Oh, are we about to see a crash air? So we'll speak about that. Okay. After you get done going through that, we're going to talk some Google McDougal. Is this an incredible buying opportunity on Google McDougal or not? We'll go ahead and react to a Wall Streeter speaking about Google McDougal as well. Then we'll get into all the moves I made here today. I sold out of one stock completely. I put a bunch of money in other stocks. We'll talk about exactly what stocks I sold, which stocks I bought, all that good stuff. The last thing we'll react to in this beast of a video here today is this one. Big short trader Steve Eisman. It's crazy. Very clear, Anthropics revenue growth has slowed dramatically. This is going to be a very important video to react to here today, okay? If you haven't already done so, can you please just smash for your boy a thumbs up? I just need one smash that thumbs up on, okay? It's busy times, man. Like, it's just a lot going on. I'm trying to cover it all for you guys. It's not easy. I mean, I'm grading income statements. It's nobody's business. The amount of conference calls going through my brain is like... I need one of those, like... artificial intelligence chips in my brain, right? And on top of that, we got the biggest sale of the year coming up for 1000xstocks.com, full access. It's less than 48 hours away, ladies and gentlemen, if you want that deal on 1000x. That will be the pinned comment down there today. That's for the entire product suite. We'll send over the deal as soon as it drops. Listen, if you're tight on money, don't get the sale. You can do what I used to do back in the day. I used to just use a bunch of different free software.
[5:00] and like spreadsheets it's a mess but you can do it right it's very time consuming thousand x is for people that are really into the market people that are looking to save massive amounts of time and not use a bunch of different services and spreadsheets all over the place and just having a mess right Thousand X is a one-stop shop for everything all in one place. And so it's really for the people out there that you know You got a good job. You got a good size portfolio and you want the best of the best outside of that like, you know Do what I used to do back in the day and just try to you know Get different free things here and free things there Like I said, it's very time-consuming as a pain in the butt, but you can do it right you can pull it off and so um If you got money, get 1,000x. If you're tight on money, don't get 1,000x. It's as simple as that. Okay, next up here, let's go ahead, let's talk some amazing zone. So should we even call it amazing zone? It's going down. Oh, man, Chinatown. Okay, here's a deal with Amazon. All right. So I posted this inside the private stock group's Discord chat. Well, Do you see what I see? Because I see something I don't like. Look at... Net product sales. 2%? 2%. two percent for net product sales for amazing zone now there's going to be excuses about oh they had a random prime day that was blah blah blah uh excuses excuses excuses At the end of the day, A 2% number is a 2% number. And I don't think this reflects as negatively on Amazon as it maybe reflects on weakness in the consumer, right? I mean, we know what's happening with gas prices. We know what's happening with people's electric bills, right? I mean, it's pretty darn clear to me that there's just too many consumer companies that are reporting too weak of numbers. that I'm like, I just don't think we're in a strong economy right now. Right. And that's fine. It's not going to stay like that forever. But that's just the reality of the situation. Like that product sales up 2% for Amazon. That's... Oh my gosh! I don't know if I've ever seen it that bad. Like legit. I don't know if I've ever seen it that bad or if it has been that bad. It's been years, like 2%. Now, net service sales was a strong spot. That was up 19%. So that's where AWS is going to come into play there. and other businesses as well, but AWS is a huge component of that, right? Total net sales, 12%. Okay. Okay growth for Amazon. We actually like to see Amazon more in that 14 to 17% range, but 12% is okay. Cost of sales up 7%, they kept that in check. Fulfillment was up 8%. I don't like that number. You know why? Because product sales were up 2%. So no bueno there, but that shouldn't come as a surprise. Have you guys seen gas prices, right? Technology and infrastructure, that was a big hit there. That was up 20% for the company year over year. Sales and marketing kept that in check. G&A up 6%, or excuse me, actually, they brought that down 6%. So that was actually a win there. Now they had us one offish, essentially $2.8 billion number here as an expense in the same quarter last year, and that didn't occur again. So that helped things out a bit. So total operating expenses up 7% for the company year over year. You'll take that. Because at the end of the day, like if you're net... If your net sales are up 12%, that's obviously a way bigger raw number. And your operating expenses up 7%, that's going to mean you're going to get great operating income growth. And that's exactly what we saw with Amazon here. 61% operating income growth on a year-over-year basis. Incredible, right? Interest income was 8% up year-over-year. But look at this. Interest expense up 214%. Oh, my gosh. From $538 million to almost $1.7 billion. And that's the issue. to take out a lot of debt to fund these data centers, okay? There's a few ways you can go about it, right? Obviously, these companies are already burning through all their cashflow, right? So that's out the window. So then from there, what do you have to do? You have to deplete your balance sheet of cash, right? So you do that to a certain extent. Then what do you do? Well, then you have to either take out debt or issue shares. Well, if you issue shares and you dilute shareholder value, It's not ideal. The other avenue is you can certainly take out debt. Debt comes with big interest payments. Even if you're a large company like Amazon or other big tech companies, like the most powerful, best companies in the world, you're still going to pay a bunch of interest on that debt. There's no way around that. And so that interest expense, man, look at how much adds up on just a year-over-year basis. 214% growth there. Like, ugh, ugh. So we had income before income taxes down 5% here, but that's because you basically had this other income in the previous year of $10 billion, and you had a $703 million expense in the same period. quarter or you know basically the most recent quarter right
[10:00] So basically numbers got juiced last year and look way better than they should have looked. Right. And then they looked worse. So that's why you see diluted EPS down here. So it's not as bad as it looks as far as that goes. So I gave him a B grade overall because if it wasn't for this one office here, the EPS growth would have still been very strong. Net income growth would have been strong. But at the same time, like I don't like that interest expense climbing that much. And it just makes me think, like, where's interest expense going to be two, three years from now if it's already here? Right. And obviously, I don't like fulfillment being up eight percent when net product sales only up two percent and technology and infrastructure being up 20 percent. That's outgrowing all growth rates there. So I don't like that. OK, now, with that being said, is Amazon a buy as a stock? Well, here's the deal. okay Amazon's always a buy I tell you guys all the time it's always a buy every single correction crash in Amazon stock it's a buy it's as simple as that it's been that way since this company went public in the 90s it's still like that in 2026 there will be a day when Amazon no longer a buy there will be a day it not today though I ain today It ain tomorrow It ain this year It ain next year There will be a day Maybe it in the 2040s. Maybe it's in the 2050s. Maybe it's in the 2030s. We'll see. But there'll be a day when Amazon's eventually not a buy, but it's not right now. At the end of the day, this company, you know, I mean, it's one of the best companies you can look at as far as big companies go, Right. So forward P wise, after the stock reaction tomorrow, the forward P on Amazon should be somewhere around like a 19, somewhere around their ballpark. Right. Like, come on, man. A 19 ish forward P for Amazon. You shouldn't be this stock shouldn't be trading anywhere near a forward P of 20 or under. Right. And that's basically the situation we're going to have with Amazon as of tomorrow. Right. And that's just a steel deal. Like there's too much long-term growth opportunity here for Amazon for this company to be anywhere around here. Like, you know, on a valuation basis. Like no, no, no, no, no, no. Like this is a steel deal on this one. So Amazon's absolutely a buy. If you looking for a giant corporation to add to your portfolio that you can sleep well at night and just add shares of for the next six to nine months Amazon definitely a great company to do that It one of the few stocks I look at as a core portfolio builder. I honestly think Amazon should be the biggest or one of the biggest top three position in every single person's portfolio. It's that sort of company. It's that sort of company that should be a top three biggest position in everybody's portfolio. Where the stock goes in the next three to six months, who knows? That stock can go to 200, it can go to 195, it can go to 280, it can go to 233, like anywhere in here. The end of the day, like the short term is going to be what the short term is going to be in regards to Amazon, right? You really got to focus on the next 5, 10, 15 years with Amazon. At the end of the day, your kids are going to order a lot of stuff on Amazon and the younger generations and the current generation is going to, like I order more and more stuff on Amazon all the time, right? And then AWS continues to get more and more popular. Like, it's just, it's a stock you got to be in, man. It's a stock you got to be in. Okay, so let's react to some Wall Streeters. Amazon, which is that the company still sees its full year cash CapEx at billion Break down what we just learned out of this earnings report So the CapEx Oh before we get rolling here okay You know if you really want me to tell you what people are really scared of with Amazon and with Google you want me to tell you the truth because they're going to make up a lot of reasons. They're going to make up reasons for Google around Google search. They're going to make up reasons for Amazon around AWS growth isn't as fast as Google's business is growing or Microsoft. They're going to make up a lot of excuses, okay, on why those stocks are selling off. But let me tell you the truth. You want the truth? Can you handle the truth? Here it is. Amazon and Google McDougal just let the cat out of the bag. That in 2027, they're upping CapEx. But not just upping CapEx. They've used words such as considerably, substantially. These companies are already spending so out of control this year. now when you start talking about we're going to considerably or substantially using those sorts of words about your capex next year oh my gosh do you know what's these capex numbers are going to be looking like next year it's ridiculous ridiculous so the free cash flow situation for these corporations is about to get all
[15:00] A lot worse. If you think it's bad now, Ain't seen nothing yet. It's going to get so much worse over this next 12 to 24 months. Like so much worse. And so that's the real thing that's scaring people. And this is something I've talked about on the channel countless times that eventually the market's going to get to a point where it's going to start to worry about this. It's just a question of do we want to deal with it in 26 or do we want to wait till next year in 27 at the beginning of the year. At some point, the market's going to throw a fit and it's going to get scared. around the CapEx numbers. It's as simple as that. This is exactly where we should be. I think the surprise over here is that they did not beat more on the AWS side. I think the consensus was around 39% and they came at 39%. But I would say that they actually gave some really good color for 27% and 28% of 40% and above. I think that's really impressive given where we are in the cycle. So I think those are the numbers that we want to hold on to at this point. It's absolutely very impressive, right? But Amazon could be looking at spending $300 billion or more on CapEx next year. Now, Look at Amazon's growth in AWS, what that's going to be next year. And then you start thinking about $300 billion of CapEx. We'll see what the numbers end up coming in at, but it could be $300 billion next year. And you start saying, oh my gosh, by the way, AMD shareholders listen. AMD shareholders. This is good news. Okay. This is what we want to see. We want to see these companies continue to up CapEx. So that's where I'm a little divided because I own Google shares as a small position. Amazon's a big position, right? Okay. And then I have AMD, which is a gigantic position. And so... Net net? it does better for me financially if Amazon and Google and these sorts of companies just spend... out of control. Right. for the next... few years here because AMD will be one of the biggest beneficiaries of that sense up on them. If you could jump in here too. I mean, obviously this is a business where so much of it is being driven by AWS and AI. This is still also a big time consumer facing company as well. How does that side of the business look to you based on what you just saw in this report? Sure. You know, the retail side of the business was soft, but that softness was not unexpected. The prime day shift, 3Q shaved about 400 basis points from the top line growth. So I'd say the underlying strength of the Amazon retail business is actually pretty solid. In fact, what was most important in this press release was the North American operating profit. That expanded to 7.7% versus I believe it was a 6% expectation. So that grew nicely. And I'd love to hear, you know, what drove that? Is it advertising or something else? But we do see underlying profit momentum increasing, wasn't a possibility until recent years. Well, give me a sense, Poonam. Why did that become a possibility? And give me a sense heading into the holiday season and really lapping into 2027, whether this is a one-off or something that actually is more structurally sustainable. So I think the possibility came from the ads business, right? The ads business is very lucrative for Amazon, and it does go hand-in-hand with the retail business. So I think as ads grow, Now, if you think about the longer term for the ads business, we do think that Amazon is still in relatively early innings for the ads business. But there is a threat there, too, right, with agentic shopping and how that will impact where ads are generated, where they're placed. Amazon is not part of external ecosystems like ChatGPT, Muse, etc. right there. Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, hold on. I'm an Amazon shareholder. It's one of the most important stocks I hold. Definitely a top five position across my portfolio of Lyset. But don't count on Alexa. Just stop it. Just stop it. There's one thing you can count on with Amazon. People go into the Amazon app on their phones and people go on the Amazon website. But don't count on people going to Alexa for shopping. Stop it. some investors, but I am curious as to why you think the knee-jerk reaction in the shares was so severe, now still down 9% as we speak. I think it's the relative beat. When you look at Microsoft consensus at right around 45%, and they did 49%, so they beat by a big amount. Same thing for Google. In the case of Amazon, the beat isn't there. But as I said, one of the things that is far more impressive to us is that they are expecting 40% growth for
[20:00] 27 and 28. Now this is a business that was growing in the early, you know, low 20s just a couple of years ago. To say that for the next two years they can still grow this business 40% is fairly impressive in our view, especially when they are the preferred cloud partner for Anthropic, which we have seen has gotten a lot of traction in the last three months. Listen, you know, I got to push back against this. Oh, so impressive. I'm going to grow 40% plus AWS. Dude, we're going to spend $225 billion on CapEx this year. and another probably 300 billion plus next year. We better freaking be growing like this because the Lord knows. that e-commerce business isn't growing strong right now. So we're spending all these fortunes of money. We better be getting some back for it. Like, come on, man. Don't act like this is special. It would be special if we weren't having to spend money. hundreds of billions of dollars a year in capex then it'd be like oh my gosh this is amazing but dude we better be getting something back for all this spend come on and internet research over at jeffrey's brent excuse me what did we actually learn out of amazon just now i mean it was an inline top line i ended me up barely the beat uh up income a little bit ahead uh ads whiffed uh so i think this view of are the agents going to look at ads or not clearly They had a flat tire in the ads business this quarter. Um, consumer core retail slightly missed at 4.6 versus 3 to 5.1. So, I mean, we're just getting a lot of bad news here the last week, right? With what's happened across Google, Amazon. And I think just the expectations have just gotten too high. So we're in a mini timeout, if you will. This is not, this is not what the bulls were hoping for. It's not terrible. Yeah. EBITDA, but this is not what anyone was hoping for. 10 times forward earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, amortization. Yeah, for Amazon, that's the thing. At the end of the day, Amazon's a steel deal for... Anybody that's got a longer term horizon, longer term horizon meaning multi-years. If you have a time horizon that's for the next three months, Pfff. Your guess is as good as mine where it goes in the next three months. Next three years, we know where it's going. It's a whole lot higher. The idea of sort of this bridge between, you know, I guess the current business models and whatever this AI future transformed these businesses into, that seemed to be part of the reaction we saw in Alphabet today. The idea that it's trying to make that bridge into AI, but the legacy ad business might not keep up as long to an extent that investors need to see. Does that become a bigger story for Amazon? compared to some of the other hyperscalers. Yeah, no, no, no, there's diversification, but let's be very clear. Microsoft has a really high margin business. that offsets this other low-margin business. Amazon has a lower-margin consumer business that's fueling the cloud business as a higher-margin business. So I think when you think about the area they're investing in... No, the cloud business is fueling the cloud business. And that's the huge profit engine for Amazon. It's been a huge profit engine for the last decade and it remains that where the core revenue comes from. So that's the first thing. Second thing, to your point, they are diversified. But again, I think what investors want is high growth, high margin, and AWS is doing really well, right? They gave a guide for over 40% growth. One of the other reasons you really want to be positioned into Amazon And, you know, this is where I would say Amazon has an advantage even over my precious meta. and even over Google McDougal, okay, listen. Amazon's used to lower margin businesses. This is nothing new for them. So Meta spending all this money and getting into lower margin businesses, it sucks because it's going to bring... Meta's margins down longer term right and so it's not fun Google McDougal same thing like Google and meta have the best business models in the world like I like get massive amounts of people to go to Google search, massive amounts of people to go to YouTube, massive amounts of people to go to Facebook, massive amounts of people to go to Instagram, WhatsApp and show them lots of ads and... You make money off that. It's amazing. It's like the best business model ever, right? Those companies have. And now they're getting into these other business models that it's not like they're um horrible business models, they're just not as good as the old business models, right? And so that's the important thing to really understand about this. Um, you know, In Amazon... You know?
[25:00] Their core business is not the most fun. It's a low margin business, but it's a huge TAM business. right um there's a reason you see all those amazon trucks driving all over your your neighborhood every single day right but uh you know, it's... It's a... business that you have to invest in for decades to get a monopoly-type market share to put yourself in a position to hopefully make a lot of profits longer term. The foreseeable future. I mean, that's not really that hard a guide to give. You and I can give that guide because they just came in at the high 30s. Their backlog growth last quarter grew 154%. So the real question is, if they're signing contract volume at 154%, why are they not converting revenue faster? these cloud companies and AI companies can't actually convert the contracted backlog to revenue as fast as investors want. We're not saying they can't do it over time. It's just there's a huge mismatch. And you've seen even Microsoft said, hey, things are delayed. We can't get it up in the current supply chain environment. We had one partner that fell down to $5 billion of committed dollars, couldn't get brought up. So I think what you're seeing is good growth. It's not a bar that investors want. Don't hate the player, hate the game. The game right now that I'm watching is everyone wants a higher level of execution. We're not seeing that. And we're not seeing that across many of the tech companies support stocks at current levels. But on the cloud side, I mean, I think about, okay, I mean, so Azure, Microsoft, we're talking 48% of growth. Obviously, Google Cloud doubled, obviously coming from a much different base than Amazon. Amazon still camped out slightly below that 40% level that I think a lot of are looking for. But should we be looking just at that headline, I guess, percentage growth rate, if you will? Should we be looking maybe a little bit more at absolute dollars or really just this idea of sort of, I guess, well, I guess my question is, what is the evidence that we're going to start to see a little bit more of that traditional enterprise cloud migration accelerating alongside AI? That's my question, Brent. Yeah, I mean, I think we're seeing that growth of the 50% margin and big, big free cash flow growth. Amazon and Google are negative. And so again, I think what you're seeing is effectively better growth, better profitability. And so there's a tale of two cities. Again, right now, I think we're in the early signs of the build out and investors are going to have to be patient for that return. But again, I think across And so, again, not bad, but the bar was higher. And for them to come in line of revenue with where the street was at at 12% growth, to effectively come in one point ahead on AWS, again, I think just the expectation is higher. And that's why you're seeing a 7% move down in the stock. So not terrible, and it's not falling apart. And they're obviously going to be one of the top three leaders. It's just this lead time on backlog. faster revenue growth. And that's not happening. Why isn't that happening? There are potential issues in the supply chain. They can't get capacity up. They can't get these DCs up. That is, What has been worrying most of our tech investors right now. And again, we didn't get any evidence yet so far that is going to quell those fears. All right, Brent, always appreciate you jumping on for us. Brent Dale, tech sector lead of software and Internet research over at Jefferies. So before we go into these other subjects that we got to talk about, AMD and... what stocks I sold and bought. We don't really talk about Microsoft much on the channel. So let's run a scenario here with Microsoft. Let's run some projections and kind of figure out, is Microsoft a good deal? So Microsoft, I think under a bull case assumption, I think about 17% revenue growth on average for a bull case assumption. And then I would say about 5% softy i think at 24 to 29 pe is fair under a bull case assumption So let's see. If we have a deal here, so bold case assumption, you get about a 20% compound annual growth rate. That's not bad. Now for my base case, I would go a little under that. So I'd go probably about 15%. revenue growth on average okay and then I would do 20 percent net income growth on average for this scenario I take my P/E ratio down just a little bit. I would take it down to 23 to 28 for a base case.
[30:00] Yes. And let's see where we're going to be at here for Mr. Softee. So, you know, not bad. It's likely going to provide you a teens. compound annual growth rate Right? So now you could assume, well, maybe earnings per share goes up even faster. Um, And that's where advanced projections come in that we have where you can actually factor in, you know, if they take shares off the market and what that does for earnings per share and whatnot. But the other thing you could assume with Microsoft is maybe they end up issuing more shares in future years for the spend. Right. And then I would say like 12 percent for a bear case on average. And I would say they don't get any net income left under a bear case assumption. Right. And then I would say like a 15 to 20 P.E. ratio. for this case, because people would be always worried about like, oh, they're about to go to single digits, they're about to go to single digits. Under that scenario, you're basically not making any money over the next several years, right? So... Thank you. Yeah, I think Microsoft's an okay buy. I do. I don't think it's as good of a buy as, let's say, AmazingZone is, Amazon, or even Google McDougal, or even Meta, but it's a buy. If you don't follow me on X, you might want to follow me on X. I always have that linked in the description area down there of all my videos. I post a lot of stuff, and right now it's busy times on X. So you might want to follow me on there if you use the platform. But what do these Intel earnings mean for AMD? Listen. It means short term, not a good move, but longer term, Um... It doesn't mean anything. Okay. So Intel, basically they're saying, Hey, you know, PC sales are going to be slower. Memory prices are a concern, right? I mean, AMD is going to be able to sell as much as they possibly can. can in terms of getting silicon from TSMC, they're going to be able to sell as much as they want for the next several years. I'm talking GPUs and CPUs. So AMD doesn't have any sort of sales problem, in my opinion. And we're not going to see a sales problem with AMD. All things are possible, but I just don't think it's very realistic. Intel's had issues for a long time. Don't forget, the stock had this insane run. Don't forget, this is a bum company. Intel's a bum company. At the end of the day, this stock was like, at the end of the day, I mean, this could be arguably a bankrupt company. If it wasn't for the government, kind of like almost bailing them out, right? This is a junk company. Intel had been on the decline for the longest time. They're getting pulled up just because the whole semiconductor space is so strong. But don't let a whole space getting pulled up in the short term clout you and then make you think like, oh, this is a good company. This is trash. Intel been trashed. AMD is the real deal Holyfield. They're the ones that was $2 a share and then went to $200, right? And obviously nowadays we know where the stock price is in the $500s. They're the ones that have been taking market share from Intel for the longest, right? They're the only ones that can give NVIDIA a run for their money. The only ones in the world. There's no one else in the world. There's no other company in the world that can at least make NVIDIA sweat a little bit and be like, let's see what they're up to. ... speak about them and be a little jaded and be like, "Hmm, why did they give away part of their company for this deal?" There's only one company that can do that. That's AMD. AMD's top tier. BIM top tier. Right? Intel junk been junk still junk. So, you know, their results is going to pull AMD down in the very, very short term as in probably tomorrow. But don't don't. Assume like, oh, Intel, this means something for AMD. AMD is the real deal, man. Intel's a piece of junk. It's been junk. It's still junk. I don't even want to say no disrespect because it's all disrespect. It's just a crappy company. I don't know what to say. Like I said, the only reason that company got bailed out is because the government – And because of just a ridiculous amount of spend on semiconductors. If it wasn't for that, the company would be BK, man. Google McDougal, is this stock a buy? Well, here's the thing, okay? Okay. If you're thinking about on a shorter term basis, it's actually probably not a buy. If you're thinking once again, multi-year, yes, it's a buy. Okay. But this chart's about to get a lot scarier and a lot worse. This is Google McDougal's free cash flow, right? I look at it. It's just piled up as the years ticked on, right? And then, and then, and it's about to plummet way worse.
[35:00] Like you're going to see some crazy negative free cash flow from Google. Like can you imagine a year from now where the free cash flow of Google McDougal is going to be? It's going to be ugly. So we're not even at peak ugliness. We're still at least probably 18 to 24 months from peak ugliness. And then after that, we'll probably settle out and then hopefully free cash flow will get better. But dude, we're like six to eight quarters before it gets like the worst, worst. mind there. So Google is a buy. If you've got a multi-year horizon, if you're just thinking about the short term, it's debatable, right? Very debatable. Okay, let's go ahead and react to Google McDougal. It's a rough quarter for the alphabet narrative. The cloud business was quite strong. It was up 103%, well ahead of expectations and margins beat expectations. But the weakness was really in the search business. Estimates were for 15% growth. The company did 12%. It doesn't And it had a comp issue where it was lapping, accelerating growth from last year. So that's likely a factor. But still, it's about a 300 basis point miss in search. And also, on that side of the business, margins missed as well. So for those that think there's a longer-term threat relating to AI, this definitely feeds into the narrative. And I think that's the issue with the stock. Well, let me get a sense, though. Just hypothetically, once they do get a little bit more up and running with regards to Gemini, Search, or whatever we're going to be calling it, Does that have the potential to be a product that can bring not only the same type of growth that search brought, and not on the revenue side, but more importantly, on the profitability and margin side? Sure. I mean, even 12% growth on the surface is great growth for the maturity that search business is. But it's an expectations miss, and you have these very – significant reactions in the stocks relating to AI, you know, based on AI winner, AI loser at any point in time? I don't think, you know, I think everybody's making a big mistake, okay? Okay. Um... I think people are looking at some of these numbers and they're thinking like it's something wrong with the company. It's like, oh, there's something wrong with Google search, blah, blah, blah. No, no, no, no, no, no. It's the economy. It's too many companies that are putting up lackluster revenue numbers for it to be company specific. Like, you know, from companies like Decker Outdoors that sells Hoka Shoes and Ugg and a bunch of other brands, right? They had to take down their revenue guide for the year, right? We know what Nike's results have been. We know what Lululemon's results have been, right? Amazon, amazing. Amazon just came in with 2% net product sales growth year over year, right? that still wasn't even like when it comes to Meta's overall advertising business, it wasn't like that was something that shocked people and was like a great number. It was kind of, you know, and then you see Google's search results business here up 12%. People are, you know, it's just at the end of the day, I think, There's a short term weakness in the economy. Right. And it's as simple as that. It's just too many companies. And I create a lot of income statements for a lot of obscure companies that we don't talk about on the channel much. Right. And even with those companies, a lot of their revenues are down year over year. Right. So, you know, look at Whirlpool's results. If you want to see weakness, look at Whirlpool's results. Yeah, I mean, there's a lot of companies that have revenue negative on a year over year basis. We're not talking positive, right? We're concerned here about... Amazon grew net product sales only 2%, right? Or Google's ad business only grew this much. I can tell you there's a lot of smaller companies right now that revenues are down, right? on a year-over-year basis. Okay, so yeah. So I do think Alphabet's already been building in AI overviews. Gemini has very good model updates recently. What I think ends up happening is the model companies all kind of find their niche in the world where they're better than their competitors. The challenge for Alphabet is it used to be the only player, you know, in terms of searching for information and now it's one of a few players and i think that normalization is something that you know can be multiple compressing to a company like alphabet but i don't really think this is like a structural issue i think the growth rate off of these more difficult labs will stabilize around these levels they in fact said that query volume growth was the fastest that it's been in the quarter um in the past five years so i'm sure they'll talk about that more in terms of the disconnect in terms of revenue growth versus the query volume growth in the quarter So, Scott, you mentioned it's not a structural issue, but when I look at Meta's ad growth in the quarter, they grew 26%. Clearly, Alphabet is not a good thing.
[40:00] Not growing, you know, same. It's less than half of Meta's growth. And they said, you know, query growth was the fastest in the last five years. So what do you make of that? Right. And I think Amazon's growth rate tomorrow for advertising will be a good bit higher than Alphabet's as well. I think that's what's happening, whether it's meta or the model companies themselves in terms of driving queries to other distribution outlets, that Alphabet's normalizing competitively. competitively. But what I think is comforting long term or why this stock can work over the longer term is because the denominator is so much larger in terms of the number of queries that even though it's not the best player in the market, it's a very satisfactory player. And when you add on top of that the success the company is now having in cloud, you have a business that's growing still 25% with mid 30% margin that now trades under 20 times earnings. Do you think they are missing an agent like Muse or Instinct here and what would that do in terms of you know the whole search situation Certainly there is the possibility that Alphabet layers agentic on top of the model Like I said earlier... Hold your horses. Let me show you guys something very important, okay? Look at this. This is Google Cloud versus Azure versus AWS, right? Now, from the Google Cloud, the thing that's a little confusing is I think they put their TPUs in there as well, from what I remember. So just something to factor in there. So I don't know if it's as clean of a growth rate as maybe the others have. But the moral of the story is here, Google Cloud, 103% growth. Azure, 48%. AWS, 39%. So, you know, you look at that and you're like, dude, this is the big dog. You got to be in Google Cloud, right? Google McDougal. It still couldn't save the stock price, but it is something to factor in there. I mean, the other thing to factor in is AWS is just a really, really large business. It's a really large business, much bigger than the other two players, especially than Google Cloud. And so it a little easier for Google Cloud to put up bigger growth rates right So something to factor in but Google the one that really like if you want the big growth you know where to go I do think that each one of the players, Anthropic, OpenAI, Meta, XAI, find their niche in this emerging world that we've headed into. And that with Alphabet, I think it's more about replacing the static blue link business with the more interactive Gemini interface than it is necessarily being the leading player in agendic commerce. But I'm certainly sure that they will have a play there. Well, I am curious, though, too, when we talk about the future going forward and a couple of interesting headlines crossing the wire, Scott. One, Sundar Pichai basically saying that the company is now running at, in his words, a half trillion dollar annual run rate. But what I thought was also interesting was their cloud CEO is on the earnings call for the first time ever. And I am curious as to what, if at all, that actually signals about where Sundar Pichai's head is at. Well if you look at the relative strength of the cloud business is doing significantly better than the search business The search business just happens to have been probably the most dominant business model in the world up until the emergence of AI And so I think this company, you know, the center of gravity is shifting a bit more towards cloud over time as the driving force of the company. And that's, you know, represented with those that participate in the conference call. And I think that's the signal right there. All right. next up here let's get in the stocks that I bought and sold here today so this is a look at the public account before I made the moves so there you go okay now let's go ahead and I covered all this in the private group here but let's show you what I made a move on look at this look what I sold I sold it all. Service now. I took my profit and I moved out. Now I took a much, I took a great profit last week on service. Now I should have sold it all. I was very tempted to and I didn't do it and I regret it big time. But the moral of the story is I still made a nice profit on it, even on these shares. And so,
[45:00] I took the profit and I moved that and I bought three different stocks. So these were heavy buys. Look at how heavy the buys were. One. Celsius Celsius the wealthiest it was a $20,000 buy there Okay? $20,000 buy at 28 bucks. I did a $27,000 buy. Um, of American Express AXP at $324, just such a top tier company. And I did a $28,000 buy of The Flicks at $61.84 there. All those I think I'm going to make a lot of money over the next three years. You know, in service now, you know, I don't hate the stock. It may be money. It's just Bill McDermott. And let me show you an updated view of the public count. This is my updated view. So American Express is now up to almost a quarter million dollar position. Celsius is up to almost a quarter million dollar position. And the Flix is up to just under $180,000 position. So those ones continue to build out. And those are honestly probably my three main focuses in the public count as far as adding more shares. Okay. Okay. But let me speak about service now before we get into Steve Eisman here. Listen, man. You know... *sigh* I mean, they talk a big game. He sells, you know... Oh, we're spending now so we can get our clients and they're going to use all these tokens in the future and all this stuff. I'm not saying he's wrong. I'm just saying like, There's just a lot of question marks, a lot of question marks. And the growth rates on revenue just haven't been nearly exciting enough. with that particular stock. When I look out there, I have Salesforce as a big position. Salesforce is going to compete head on in a lot of ways with ServiceNow. They both are going to compete hard, right? But I look at Salesforce and I just feel safer in that stock for the next several years than I do ServiceNow. and I think I think Benioff's a better CEO than Bill McDermott is. And so I've got to bet on, especially when you're going into uncharted waters, you've got to really bet on the CEO you trust more. I trust Benioff more. And so, and I trust the business model more of Salesforce than ServiceNow. So it's not like I'm like, oh, ServiceNow is doomed. You know, I need out of the stock because, you know, it's going to go bankrupt. No, that's not how I feel. I just feel like there's much better places for my money. right, for the next several years. I... feel like Salesforce will outperform service now over the next three to five years. And so, I put my money where my mouth is. Maybe I'm right. Maybe I'm wrong. But hey, that's the cost of doing business, baby. OK. All right. Next one up here. Steve Eisen. that to go what your thoughts are here. Tell us the truth. You're saying that what Dario and Sam say about concerns for humanity, Plain and simple. It's just a lie. It's all self-serving. And it has to do with the emergence of open bottles and there's no moat for them. I think the word I actually use was stronger than lie, but can't say it on television. Yeah. But, uh... - Look, I just think, that what they're trying to do is create hysteria so that The industry will become regulated. And they think then that they can manipulate the regulation to keep the Chinese open-weight models out of the country. And you think that AI at this point... in its evolution is that like the stage of a firecracker. not a hydrogen bomb. In other words, you think it's not sentient at this point. It's not sentient at all. It's a glorified search. Actually, the way I would put it is it's a very complicated word retrieval model. Meaning you ask it a question like, I'll make up a question. Why did the Roman Empire fail? And so it goes through the entire chain and then predicts what the next word would be. and then it goes back to the beginning of the chain works all its way back again, takes the word that it just created and predicts the next word. That in a way is what AI is. That's not sentient. We're not anywhere close. Is it possible to be sentient? - Well, I don't think what it is right now, it could be sentient. Could something eventually become sentient? - Sure. - Can I just push back on one piece of this? - Sure.
[50:00] The argument that this is sort of a regulatory capture effort afoot, by the way, may be in fact the result of the comments that they've made. Having said that, what I would ask you is when you go back and look at the comments, for example, that Sam and Elon made. I go back in 2015, before OpenAI started, I interviewed both of them together. together. And the entire point of what they were talking about then in 2015 was to build open AI in a way to avoid this. They were talking about the risks then. Dario was talking about the risk in 2017. You can go look before Anthropic existed. You can go back and look at what Demis, who was at DeepMinds, was saying in 2012. And so I don't disagree that the implication, the results of these comments could be a form of regulatory capture or something that protects them. But the idea that this is somehow either hypocritical or made up or some kind of you know that the motivation of what they been saying is somehow some sea change because they now are in some vaunted position What do you think of that I think these guys have all read too much science fiction Okay. I really believe that. And you're talking to someone who's probably read just as much science fiction as they have. I just don't take it nearly as seriously as they do. I think they take it very seriously. And so they really... I'll put it to you like this, right? let's say i'll break this down for you okay let's say there's a dad and his dad one of his kids is really good at the sport and so that dad invests all his time and all his money and resources into this kid because his dad really believes that this kid's going to be you know professionally going to be the greatest ever at the sport and he's just like you know he's in that state right That's what these guys are. Like these guys are so invested in this whole thing. They think it's going to be the greatest thing ever. They think it's, you know, going to be so powerful and all this. No different than a dad would of his son or his daughter that they're going to be the greatest tennis player ever, the greatest golfer ever, the greatest football player ever, all these things, right? Like it very natural And so you almost have to have that delusional belief to even be able to try to make that a reality Right And so that where these guys are at You know it just human psychology I mean, you know, study psychology a little bit. I think they at some point they believe it. I just think they're wrong. I see nothing. I see nothing. But that may be right. But that's different. Right. Then saying all of this is. some kind of change jam operation to try to protect them. I think that if you really would wake them up at 3 o'clock in the morning, they would say we're not even close. This is nonsense. Nonsense. That's what I sincerely believe. I don't believe a word that comes out of their mouths. Not one word. The scary thing is that since there isn't a moat, you think there's going to be a race to the bottom. Everybody said you don't need a... If you're going to drive to a supermarket, you don't need a... Yeah, it's funny. I actually don't believe anything those guys say either. I truly don't. I don't know what it is about Sammy Altman there and this Dario guy. There's just something about them. I don't trust anything they say. I don't know. I actually agree 100% with Steve Eisenman here. I don know what it is but I I wouldn trust anything they say Like you know like so maybe that just like sometimes I don know man Like, like there's always been a thing with Zuckerberg where people don't trust Zuckerberg. You know, I trust Zuckerberg more than I trust those two guys. I'll say that. Right. And I don't even think Zuckerberg is the most trustworthy guy, certainly. Right. and his other CEOs you know I really would trust and think they're going to tell you how it is but those guys have never come across like Bezos actually Bezos always come across as as actually like in my opinion a straight shooter Andy Jassy who was under Bezos always come came across the straight shooter so there's there are certain CEOs that I'm like I you know Lisa Sue is certainly one I think has always been very much a straight shooter who I would trust. But some of these CEOs, man, they're questionable. Sam Altman, questionable. Dario, questionable. You know, a G-Wagon, a Mercedes G-Wagon to drive to the supermarket. Absolutely. That, at the end of the day, you know, when you think about how you know, from NVIDIA to the hyperscalers to Anthropic and OpenAI, the whole chain depends upon the health of the
[55:00] - Topic and open AI, at least at this point. And they have business models that I am quite convinced. So they say this, and you say they beg for regulation, and then they use that regulation to create moats. To keep the Chinese out. Correct. which I don't think is going to happen. Have you guys ever seen – what's that movie called? Oh, The Social Network. Great movie. One of my favorites of all time, right? Social Network, great movie. And the character that's playing Zuckerberg, you know – They're talking and he's like, you know, like they're talking about how big this is gonna be right in this is actually you know about the Facebook story and founding Facebook and like making it into this big thing and whatnot right and talking about like, you know how big it's gonna be and like we're all gonna live on the internet in the future and like, you know, that's gonna be the real world and all this stuff right and there's some level of truth to that right we all are on this internet thing we all live part of our lives. on the internet, right? But it's not like that's the full thing. Like we all have this real life and friends and family we see every day in person. And like, you know, like life still occurs in the physical world. It's not like we're all just wearing goggles and we're just like in this like fake reality, right? But you know, you could... believe like that's what was going to happen. So at the end of the day, like, you know, with those guys, they're going to believe in their product and service and you know, some of what they say is going to be true and a lot's not going to be true. Okay. All right, guys, appreciate you joining me as always. Thank you so much for being here. Thank you for being subscribed to the channel. Thank you for smashing the thumbs up button. I appreciate all that. And once again, I got a massive thousand X sale coming for you guys. It is less than two days away. If you want access to that, that will be the pin in the comment down there and click on that, put in your name and over the deal when it does drop and enjoy that. All right, guys, much love and have a great day.
