Sailor's moat was giving banks and international institutions exposure to Bitcoin via a standard stock ticker. But about 8 other companies (and growing) started to do the same, and that's deflated the premium of MSTR's NAV vs Bitcoin holdings. Gone are the 2x days.. And he is still on the hook to buy back strategy notes that banks bought when MSTR was sky high. For example, the banks who bought in Nov 2024 can force Saylor to buy back their notes for over $600 / share in 2028, plus special interest. https://www.strategy.com/press/microstrategy-completes-3-billion-offering-of-convertible-senior-notes-due-2029-at-0-coupon-and-55-conversion-premium_11-21-2024 Saylor's gabling that Bitcoin triples between now and then so he can still turn a profit by selling his coins to hand back $600/share to these banks.

---

It’s okay the more people think weird, the greater the market drops, and we get buying opportunities. Eventually when AI and Frontier company’s moat will become inevitable, price will jump back up giving long term holders the profit they deserve.

---

Yeah, obviously if the rich told everyone they were erecting a moat to keep the lower classes out of inflation-resistant equity investments they would have problems. It is much better PR to advertise it as "consumer protection." You know, "We would love to let you make your own decisions, but you might make the wrong decisions, and then where would we be?"

---

Even if NVDA only meet estimates of 1.22 per share, that will still show some crazy exponential growth. With results like that and a still wide economic moat (maybe even widening with their continued investments and partnerships), it will be hard for them to seem overpriced. If they beat earnings on top of that, they’ll be back to 200 easily 🤞🤞

---

The moat is that this one will have the apple logo and/or signal that you have the money to spend on an overpriced piece of cloth. Products like these are all about showing higher socioeconomic status so you can sneer at the unwashed masses who buy the reasonably priced alternative. Welcome to the modern age where people rank how worthy a human is based purely on their wealth. 

---

City by-law officials said I couldn’t build a moat around my home. Pussys

---

> Zuck will get canned for chasing pet projects where they have no competitive advantage or moat. Canned by who? He has majority voting shares (his shares are something like 5-10x preferential).

---

> 70B in annualized net income over 15 years. Zuck will get canned for chasing pet projects where they have no competitive advantage or moat. Revenue and costs will grow with inflation. Earnings with stabilize at ~2024 nominal and grow with inflation. This doesn't entirely make sense. It's directly contradictory but fuck me, I guess I'll give it a shot. If both revenue and costs will grow with inflation, how do earnings remain stagnant? Everyone's revenue and costs grow with inflation. That's not specific to Meta. If affects literally everyone and every company. Nominal earnings aren't adjusted for inflation. When nominal earnings are adjusted for inflation they become real earnings. If they **grow with inflation** they won't be 70b, will they? But whatever. We can only work with the number we have today. As far Zuck, no one knows the future. Maybe this is his peak. Maybe it's all downhill from here. But considering he just grew his advertising division last quarter, and has produced incredible growth since his IPO, history is not on your side. Facebook has a competitive advantage. Instagram has a competitive advantage. Whatsapp has a competitive advantage. Ad spend is *increasing* for all of them. There is absolutely nothing in that balance sheet to suggest Meta will generate 70b in net income for the next 15 years (nominal or realized), which apparently is your guiding light, as an "investor". Last year they posted a 60 percent jump in net income. Your only "analysis" is "Zuck has lost it". That is a perfectly good reason to not buy a stock but it's certainly not the principled and diligent analysis of their earnings you claimed to take into consideration as a studious investor. Which is why your numbers don't match any other serious analysis of the stock.

---

\~$70B in annualized net income over 15 years. Zuck will get canned for chasing pet projects where they have no competitive advantage or moat. Revenue and costs will grow with inflation. Earnings with stabilize at \~2024 nominal and grow with inflation. $70\*15/2.5B shares outstanding = 415, but nominal revenue/cost will grow, so 450.

---

MOAT etf - 30 shares bought at $99 on Oct. 13 Sold today for $99.24. Usually a good ETF for hanging on to your cost basis short term or very slowly going up long term. Why sell? I want that dry powder 😩 black Friday sales are coming early to the stock market.

---