저자: JimCramer · 외국인
요약 보기
엔비디아 하락 원인으로 중국 칩 수출 논쟁과 AI 버블 우려가 거론되며, 마이클 버리의 엔비디아·팔란티어 풋옵션 숏 베팅이 소개됨. Cramer는 버리의 숏이 과도하다고 보며 엔비디아 숏 대신 헤지(풋 매수 등) 수준의 대응을 제시. 오라클·메타의 부채 조달 전략은 현금흐름 기반으로 문제없다는 입장.
다듬은 글
A Brian for aggress. Jeffy, China's Policy Shock and Nvidia would like to know if Jensen Kuang would choose to enter and purchase Denny's enter and place a $7 bid. That was Jensen's early years. Done a lot of toilet cleaning. Both he and I worked as bus boys. He used to work as a dishwasher. My father told me that if you ever work as a dishwasher, that's really beneath you.
I said in my journal, I've cleaned a lot of dishes. Kramer outlines the worldwide risk of Nvidia. Speaking of Jensen, the journal examines how his attempts to urge the Secretary of State and other officials for the sales to China were met with resistance. I believe that there was a regrettable choice between the greatest and the worse.
There were many chips that in my opinion would have kept the Chinese accountable to us, but I am aware that it became into a globalist versus non-globalist debate. Additionally, Jensen is regarded in Washington as the quintessential globalist. He probably believed that we would be more powerful if they were allowed to write on our technology and software and that they would never employ us for defense anyhow.
However, I believe there were good reasons on both sides. I decided to go with Jensen since I felt he was more convincing. I simply believe that the other guys are saying, "Listen, well, just because they won't understand why Nvidia is viewed differently in Washington." Interestingly, despite the fact that he is Taiwanese, a country that we all acknowledge faces existential dangers, he is more willing to sell to China.
I am aware that you would say, "Listen, he's the foremost globalist of our time. When you talk to the Peter Navaro contingent, Peter has been quite silent in the White House. And if you listen to him, what he's saying is that you should have the Chinese right on our gear if you want to know what they're up to.
And that seemed reasonable to me. Threat from China versus AI leadership, regardless of whether it's Oracle or Meta. There's always a reason for a downdraft like this. I mean, recall how Deep Seek caused Nvidia to drop from 160 to 90 in January. However, have a look at its current location. And my argument is that when it comes to Oracle, you have two options.
You have two options. Either you think Open Eye will fulfill all of its promises and announcements, or you think it won't. It will likely take another 2 years to find out the answer to that question. Oracle and Meta are struggling with the topic of why they are using debt to finance their operations.
And for the past week, I have been saying this. You've heard it, Frank. I'll tell it one more. If you're the Ellison's or anybody else in the Oracle suite and you're looking at this and thinking, I have a $250 stock or a week ago a $280 stock, that's why they're financing this with debt. I can either go to the debt markets and find lenders willing to lend me money at 5 to 6% depending on the duration, or I may issue stock that I believe will be $350 in a year and forfeit a 25% gain in order to finance these data centers.
I wonder what I should do. Additionally, the cash flows they presently have allow them to borrow at 5 to 6% maturity. Although there are concerns about how high or low those cash flows are on these data centers, the truth is that they are positive and that's what's paying down the debt. Therefore, this seems like a no-brainer to me.
As I have stated numerous times, corporate finance 101 okay. A breakdown of Oracle and Meta's debt strategies. Seion Asset Management, a Bury hedge firm, recently published records revealing significant short positions against Nvidia and Paltor. Bur is now taking a risk with options rather than equities.
Additionally, his wager against Palanteer is close to $1 billion according to the publicly accessible documents. Even though his wager against Nvidia is smaller, it is still close to $187 million. the billion dollar short bet made by Michael Bur. These wagers pale in comparison to the market capitalizations of these corporations.
However, the fact that such a well-known investor is taking the risk of pursuing two of the most popular companies globally is creating a stir of its own. During his appearance on Squawkbox this morning, Palenter founder and CEO Alex Karp expressed his thoughts on these wagers without holding back. It's really strange because as far as I can tell, the two businesses he's shorting are the ones profiting the most.
It's absolutely insane to think that you want to short chips. It's a flying mammal, which is the word we couldn't remember. In any event, everything appears upside down and a man in a black suit is present. In any case, all of this occurs as investors struggle with more high and concentrated values.
Who is correct, Kramer or Bur? According to new statistics from Jeff The spread between the S&P 500, which as we showed you yesterday, is about 40%, just a few large technology stocks, and the rest of the market has not been this large since 2003. Bur has provided us with some hints through his Twitter account.
But we are unsure of the precise reason behind this wager. Using his movie pictures of Christian Bale, he shared this image from a prior account with the caption, "Sometimes you see bubbles." Additionally, he shared a photo of the popular investing book Capital Account, emphasizing the sharp decline in telecom Prices.
Following the collapse of the internet bubble, market realities and insights into options strategy naturally. This morning, we did get in touch with Michael Bur. He refused to address his opinions or his post. To be clear, it's unclear if Bur is benefiting from today's decline. Positions as of the end of September are reflected in the filing.
He could have closed them, of course. He could have made them twice as big. He might have made any kind of adjustment. However, those two equities are currently down in value. Nvidia is down over 3% while Palanteer is down almost 8%. Let's discuss all of this in more detail, including the risks and potential workings of the trade.
Chris Murphy, Susuana's co-head of derivative strategy, and Jeff Kilberg, CEO of KKM Financial, will now join us. They are both highly renowned for their emphasis on both past and present alternatives. Chris, I will begin with you. You are now an expert in options. To begin with, how do you generally feel about this trade?
Second, why do you suppose he would choose options over equity? Brian, hello. You kind of got it exactly right. The details of these puts are not sufficiently known to us. They might not only be out of money and barely worth 10 cents, but they might also have expired. Thus, I believe that this is less aggressive than just going out there and shorting the stock until we have more information.
And if Michael Bur is prepared to provide further information, that is the most amount he might lose if he purchases an out of Omany put option. Additionally, because the magnitude of the option trade is multiplied by the stock's current value, such hypothetical calculations significantly overestimate the size of these options.
Again, again, we have no idea if he paid 5 cents or $50. Yes, listen to Jeff Kilberg, who is essentially warning people about fake news on his Twitter account. The filings are accurate. These belong to the SEC. I therefore wish to draw attention to that. Furthermore, we are unsure of the precise current state of affairs.
The concept that Bur who went against practically everyone in the world in 2006 is kind of doing it again is in my opinion the main focus perhaps Jeff can address this. What do you think of the trade itself not the mechanics? You're correct though when it came to the big short the movie was much better than the book.
He profited greatly from the subprime transaction but keep in mind that he entered that trade 2 years ahead of schedule. He therefore experienced considerable discomfort related to the deterioration of his put ownership. His huge call his 2021 large decline on Tesla or his 2023 simple tweet to sell the S&P 500 is what's intriguing.
Tesla doubled since 2021. The S&P 500 increased by almost 70% as well. Hollywood is unlikely to call to produce a film on either of those requests. In my opinion, this is where I want to be measured. Chris raises an excellent point. In my opinion, the true notional value is unknown to us. What he's hedging is unknown to us.
However, the SEC document or 13F that you mentioned is rather obscure. We are not given an expiration date. He might not be involved in this trade. However, attacking Alex Karp and Nvidia would be akin to attacking Zeus and Apollo, the two AI gods. If you were to add a little Greek mythology, Nvidia is the deity of about $5 trillion, while Palanteer Zeus's newborn son is currently valued at about $500 billion.
Therefore, I find it extremely hostile that he is attacking the AI gods in this way. Furthermore, I'm not sure why you wish to short AI. You can hedge and provide protection, but I believe it is a terrible idea to try to be too short. I believe it's bat guano. What's intriguing though is that Chris mentioned it.
If you're just wanting to hedge, give it some thought. Currently, Nvidia owns 10% of the S&P 500. Therefore, you can wait until the conclusion of the December 19th expiration. If you want to hedge, you can purchase a 190 pot at a price that is roughly $10 less than where Nvidia is presently trading.
You can pay $8. And if your portfolio is more akin to an AI beta, that might provide you with some hedge. Therefore, I believe it makes perfect sense to take some profits off the table if you wish to register earnings synthetically. However, I believe that attempting to short Nvidia is a short
Comments 0