IBM

clem82

He’s not crazy, it’s actually true. It gets smarter, we’ve proven this many times, we’ve even made a game show beating the IBM machine Altman may sound crazy but there’s a reason when they wanted to out him they instead outed the board who did it and his workers ALL quit

DennysGrandSlamm

I warned you all, QUANTUM COMPANIES ARE A SCAM. If you want exposure to the tech but google or IBM. SHORT RIGETTI IONQ D-WAVE

poodle_popsy

"Development philosophies" lol. Both Nighthawk and Willow have a square (grid-like) connectivity. Regurgitating terms like "reducing compiler overhead" shows how clueless you are. IBM moving from the current heavy-hex connectivity to a square connectivity will obviously enable better compilation of programs. But the hardware architecture IS the same as Google's Willow. So both Willow and Nighthawk will have the same connectivity among qubits, albeit they'll probably have different qubit numbers. BOTH are/will try to achieve the lowest possible gate error rates. "Error tolerance" is also not a standard term used in the community. Willow has been used to demonstrate "quantum error correction", and IBM will probably do that using Loon with their gross code. For historical context, IBM moved to the heavy-hex connectivity to improve their two-qubit gate fidelities. Reducing the maximum degree of connectivity to 3 allowed them to have lower crosstalk errors on the device. However, this connectivity is terrible for compiling programs, and their move back to a square connectivity with Nighthawk is them essentially falling back to what Google has been developing for the past few years. IBM also uses a different kind of transmon qubits called fixed-frequency transmons, while Google uses flux-tunable transmons.

Mkarim2

IBM

SurveyIllustrious738

No data about performance metrics, fidelity etc. IBM, Google and the other big tech receive less scrutiny than the small players, like IonQ.

Butchyellie

QBTS is going to be the winner other then IBM when it comes to Quantum no scam

Working-Active

IBM's Watson went on Jeopardy in 2010 and they aren't even considered as an AI competitor anymore.

betitallon13

I was young, but I recall the comparisons to 1987 had already started percolating in 1997, when there was a pretty good sized daily drop in the fall, and everyone watched the next morning to see if it would happen again, and initially the DOW (which more people paid attention to at the time) was down something like 500 points (which was much more substantial against a 7500 point DJIA), and then (I believe) Microsoft, IBM and Intel (and others) stepped in with HUGE buyback commitments, juicing their own stocks along with the boarder market. Going forward from there everyone figured it was just delaying the inevitable, but no one wanted to miss out on the gravy train, so the S&P still nearly doubled, the NASDAQ tripled, and the DOW rose another 40% into the 2000 crash.

Frozen_Shades

Not much volume but strong buying on IBM

themrsir6

I hope some of ya’ll have IBM calls

AcademicStandard3701

Oh IBM YES DADDY 🤑 🤤

BlLB0

Instead of focusing on management's reputation, focus on the incentive structure and the economic realities of the business. A company with a strong moat can often succeed despite average management. A company with a poor business model will eventually fail, regardless of who is in charge check Kodak, Intel, IBM, Boeing. Your analysis should prioritize the durability of the business first and management's alignment second, management can be replaced, but the business it self cant so easily.

Evolvedyouth

I have IBM KO GE QSR some other random losers too. I multi bagged IONQ from 8 to 76 and said fuck it i like PYPL. 

Anxious_Cheetah5589

Here are the top S&P 500 companies in 2010, ranked by market cap: Exxon Mobil: The largest company, representing 3.2% of the index. Apple: Held 2.6% of the index. Microsoft: Held 1.8% of the index. General Electric: Held 1.7% of the index. Chevron: Held 1.6% of the index. IBM: Held 1.6% of the index. Procter & Gamble: Held 1.6% of the index. AT&T: Held 1.5% of the index. Johnson & Johnson: Held 1.5% of the index. JPMorgan Chase: Held 1.5% of the index. It's possible that today's high flyers will still be on top in 15 years, but it's unlikely. I have no idea what this list will look like in 15 years. I'm happy at this point to just diversify using low cost ETFs and rebalance quarterly.

Evolvedyouth

Far from dying. New stewardship is doing all of the right things. They are growing monetization oppurtunities throughout their ecosystem. Its not your mommy and daddys paypal anymore. Stablecoin implementation, moving into India (huge economy), creating an ad ecosystem in tandum with google for all of their shopowners, just partenered with ChatGPT for agentic shopping, venmo is expanding in multiple directions.  I lool for 5 year lows and turnaround stories. GE IBM etc. I also look for shady short selling. This hits both. GLTY

goodolarchie

> 2019 was way before the AI boom (bubble) began. Maybe to the lay person. But my company's products that customers were paying 7 figures for a multi-seat dea were deeply laden with Bayesian inference models, predictive AI and a handful of features. IBM had Watson, Salesforce had Einstein, there was all kinds of use cases and functional chatbots (early LLMs), they just hadn't replaced the search engine as a consumer commodity.

mh699

IBM releases new mainframe hardware every few years, banks aren't using the same physical mainframes they were using 30 years ago, not at all an apt comparison

PersonalRelative8616

I will use my life savings to buy IBM

BanditoBoom

Yeah…but have you actually looked at the performance of the nifty fifty over the next decade? Yes SOME of those companies turned out to not be able to justify those high P/Es But SOME companies DID turn out to justify those high P/Es In fact from my perspective it was about 50/50 split Coca-Cola, Pepsi, JNJ, IBM, American Express, GE, and so on absolutely justified their high P/Es based on their performance since then. The only thing a high P/E tells you is that you have to be INCREDIBLY detailed in your analysis and investment thesis, and be extremely judicial in where you out your money.

AcademicStandard3701

IBM always make me horny only thing green when everything else is red

Outrageous_Tip_2133

IBM is the 2nd most notable company after GOOGL deeply involved in quantum computing research.

Ragebait_Destroyer

I feel like the most obvious are the fully priced ones like Google, Microsoft. If you think about it, there's IBM... oracle... Google... micro... Amazon.. that's only the big names. Don't get me wrong, I don't predict that this company will certainly fail or anything, but let's just suppose we are in a bubble like dotcom.. who will survive? the ones taking out heavy debt for capex are Oracle, meta, and core weave. they are the highest risk. The two things to consider: how diversified is their revenue and how much debt do they have? I would take Amazon any day over core weave personally. but if you are still interested, keep watching their earnings and see what progress they're making in these areas. IBM might be interesting too but I haven't looked into them much

MBBIBM

For full-year 2024, IBM's revenue was $61.9 billion, with Software being the largest segment at approximately $27.1 billion (43%), followed by Consulting at around $20.7 billion, and Infrastructure at about $14.4 billion. Maybe consider doing literally any research before commenting.

rn_journey

I've researched into the technology rather than trusting single opinion articles. The analogy is apt from a scientific perspective. We have an idea, we have done some testing, but none of the nuclear fusion technologies that have been proven to work in theory avoid extremely difficult issues to deal with before becoming commercially viable, and have no proven path to work on a smaller scale. For example, problems such as: not blowing up, not wearing out extremely quickly, not generating radioactive waste, avoiding terrorism risks, producing net energy, setting up fuel supply chain, and being economically viable. Therefore, whilst any technology is possible, just like the market, timing is everything. This is why I suggest sticking to large corps which may be developing new technology and patenting it (e.g. IBM, Alphabet, Microsoft). Effectively DCA in to these over the next 10 years in case a leap forward in development takes place. Based on current evidence, the likelihood of a small startup (<$2bn funding) making a commercially viable nuclear fusion or quantum product for datacenters in the next five years, is nearly zero. After five years, the datacenter building boom will be over and all will already require power. Betting on this technology is similar to betting on pharma companies on drug-release news. I support the idea of nuclear fusion, but loathe projects and press releases which misconstrued the science and engineering. Meanwhile, the real work is being done by individuals who know the theory and viability of these technologies, and release peer-reviewed work.

Difficult_Physics704

Look at number of outstanding shares. The reason you are seeing a million dollars on the chart is because of reverse stock splits. This company a few years ago was absolutely 💩, but they have been working towards being legit, so they have been doing reverse splits to both lower the amount of shares as well as keeping up with Nasdaq requirements throughout time, but they are about to blow up. Working with IBM, tokenization of assets. This company has been preparing for the time we are in now.

trader_dennis

XMAG is still tech heavy. AVGO AMD IBM

JBstockIdeas

I already own 500 shares, not alot but i also already had made the trade free, IBM working with them is still a thing so it’s staying in the port for now

collegefootballfan69

Except for IBM they are light years ahead of everyone else

bdh2067

Except for IBM and GooG, in which case tech might be more like 3 years away

Dizzy_Maybe8225

I heard a discussion about takeovers. But why the heck any company will make an offer for such a crappy companies? I feel like puking after checking the most recent financial statements of QBTS, even same feeling for IONQ. RGTI is the worst. QUBT is bad but need to check how it goes. History shows a few Quantum companies that started 7 to 8 years back, check their charts..they tell something about this Quantum companies.. and ended up with a lot of reverse splits and secondary offerings. They are still not profitable yet. If these pumpers are thinking these are the only Quantum companies, then they are wrong. Someone misled and then the whole traders and pumpers joined hands on QBTS, IONQ, RGTI. In the end these companies and management benefited and made tons of money by diluting. Once the locking period ends, they sell, why? When companies dilute , it is a sign that they are in desperate need for cash and they know they will not profit. These companies diluted so much that they think they can survive 5 years or so, but soon they will end up diluting again in an year. Check other old Quantum companies. Even IBM has spent a lot for decades, and pure Quantum is a mess as it only has losses for the rest of their life.

AffectionateAge5184

So me and two buddies have been day trading options like responsible degenerates — solid data, deep analysis, backtesting the hell out of everything. We built a strategy that printed for weeks… and then the last two weeks came along and absolutely wrecked it. We broke the AI ecosystem into layers — NVDA obviously sits on the throne, but we actually ranked ASML higher because it’s basically the only company on Earth that can do what it does. Everything made sense… until the market decided logic was optional. Here’s the thing — day trading options is straight-up dangerous unless you have discipline. Hard stop losses. Strict entries and exits. No “I’ll just hold a bit longer.” That’s the quickest route from +80% to -100% before your coffee cools. Our core strategy: buy cheap short-dated calls (2-week expirations) on names our data flagged, hedge with puts for downside, roll and repeat. Simple — on paper. And honestly, if we’d just followed our damn plan, we’d be bathing in profit right now. Perfect example: IBM. We spotted that pop a week early. Our data was screaming at us. We even talked about how we’d play it… and then nobody pulled the trigger until it was already ripping on our screens. Moral of the story: the market doesn’t care how smart your model is if your discipline sucks. Don’t day trade options with money you can’t afford to lose. You’ll think it’s a cliche until it hits you in the face.

0213896817

The following companies (with their qubit technology approach) have been selected for Stage B at this time: * **Atom Computing**: Boulder, Colorado (scalable arrays of neutral atoms) * **Diraq:** Sydney, Australia, with operations in Palo Alto, California, and Boston, Massachusetts (silicon CMOS spin qubits) * **IBM:** Yorktown Heights, New York (quantum computing with modular superconducting processors) * **IonQ:** College Park, Maryland (trapped-ion quantum computing) * **Nord Quantique:** Sherbrooke, Quebec, Canada (superconducting qubits with bosonic error correction) * **Photonic Inc**.: Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada (optically-linked silicon spin qubits) * **Quantinuum:** Broomfield, Colorado (trapped-ion quantum charged coupled device (QCCD) architecture) * **Quantum Motion:** London, UK (MOS-based silicon spin qubits) * **QuEra Computing:** Boston, Massachusetts (neutral atom qubits) * **Silicon Quantum Computing Pty. Ltd.:** Sydney, Australia (precision atom qubits in silicon) * **Xanadu:** Toronto, Canada (photonic quantum computing)

Strange_Service9547

Came here to say the same. IBM is doing fantastic. (For me)

Equal-Suggestion3182

The others are not "coming and going" all the time. MAG7 is the top 7 companies by market capitalization and they don't change often. You seen to be mixing up things. TSMC was never in the top 7. Nor IBM, nor Oracle, nor the Chinese BATs, nor Cisco, nor Intel, nor Netflix. Broadcom is in now. Tesla out. Nvidia has been in for quite some time. MAG7 doesn't even mean it is a good thing to buy it. If Nvidia stays table it will become a bad thing to buy Nvidia stocks but they will remain MAG7.

internetroamer

With the value of hindsight we can say those old companies failed because they failed to adapt and innovate with new technology so other new companies were able to adopt new technology and outgrow those older companies. Like the shift from selling servers to enterprises to personal computing with IBM. But these companies are facing a new tech wave (AI) and are doing great navigating it and adopting it. I don't see other new companies growing enough to replace them. Like sure there's anthropic and openai then smaller AI companies but none to replace the mag 7. Ultimately AI experience is most influenced by distribution by the device you have. Apple Google and Microsoft have the ability to integrate ai on our devices and no one else has that. Sure apple is lagging but it only makes me more bullish long term because current AI is mediocre anyways and it'll take time to test and build out software infrastructure/tooling to properly leverage AI. Let's see over the next 10 years but I think these companies own the best platforms to benefits from AI and main point is they won't be leapfroged in tech like previous companies.

gopoohgo

I don't understand how these guys are going to monetize it, especially when NVDA is trying to power the hardware side, and they are competing against IBM, GOOG, and sovereign research on the application side.

Ctofaname

Few things. They increased the employee stock discount from 5% to 15%. This created a ton of buying pressure solidifying the bottom. They axed the 401k match which gave them more free cash flow over night. People will reference layoffs but IBm has been laying people off year over year for the better part of the last 2 decades. Layoff a dept and hire another. A lot of offshoring but not critical rolls. Opening up bandwidth for those that are stateside to focus on newer technology and initiatives. Then of course.. quantum hype. IBM is the clear leader in quantum. They are focused on quantum cloud to commercialize it.. whether quantum has utility and ibm will be successful in quantum is for someone far smarter. The masses say quantum has no utility but I'm not sure if that's true because the masses aren't experts and are parroting others thoughts. Feels like one of those situations where everyone is ignoring it until they've missed the boat.

beefydontdie

Holy hell, IBM is rocking a 60B revenue!

imstickinwithjeffery

I hear you on all your points, I just think that these companies today are way higher quality. They have better profit margins, and are way more scalable and less capital intensive than say IBM was in its time. Plus their customers are literally everyone on Earth.

Vegetable-Crew9393

I'm in my 20s and even I can see how prevalent Nokia and IBM were just by looking at the advertising they did in movies lol. My parents didnt stop calling computers IBMs until the late 2000s

justinballsonya

It is empirically proven to be the case that stocks with high valuations tend to underperform the market long term. I mean, we quite literally have the data. Amongst the Nifty Fifty was IBM, Texas Instruments, General Electric and AMP. What possible reason in 1973 would you have that these companies would underperform the overall stock market over the next 50 years? These were the leading tech companies of the time. IBM literally had a monopoly on computers and owned an absolute shit ton of patents along with GE. How could they have let that slip away? Mismanagement. Every individual stock has that risk. Of the MAG 7 stocks, it's guaranteed that some of them will stumble and be supplanted. Shit, it's not that long ago NVIDIA and Microsoft were considered bad buys and these stocks were called FAANG, and included Netflix. What possible reason is there for Tesla's market cap to be over 300 times it's earnings? Meta is already underperforming the market. I mean if the reason for the MAG 7 growth is because of AI, why is Apple even included when they are betting AI is going to be a bust? Google was considered DOA because of their lack of investment in AI, now they are a good buy because they are pouring a bunch of money in it to play catch-up? I'm as invested in the MAG 7 as the average person is, but to think they are likely to outperform is just not logical when their combined P/E ratio is 41 and the S&P 500 itself is 31 which has always indicated a recession.

gitartruls01

The difference is that those companies faded from public interest as soon as they stopped innovating or fumbled their ventures. No one's talked about IBM for decades and Nokia pretty much died after their windows phones flopped from a lack of apps and support. That might happen with some of the Mag7 companies, but we'll surely notice their downfall as brands if it does

chr1spe

How is it different than IBM, Nokia, AT&T, etc. in the past? Tech is extremely volatile, and we're entering a clear period of heightened volatility. I think what you're saying is very ignorant of the past.

Temporal_Integrity

I agree with you, but Jensen actually fits the mythology. Jensen comes from a middle class background. His mom was a teacher and his dad an engineer. It's not like he was born in an alley, but he didn't get where he is because his mom was on the board of IBM. There are millions of people who are as well off or even better off than he is who could never touch him. His parents had to sell damn near everything they owned to afford his education. Jensen had to scrub toilets to pay for his table tennis hobby. He's just a really smart guy. He graduated high school at 16 while being an accomplished enough table tennis player that Sports Illustrated wrote about him. Jensen is one of those rare people who if he was born behind a dumpster he would still die a millionaire. Sure, he wouldn't become a billionaire, but he was always going to make it. Jensen moved to USA when he was 9 years old and couldn't even speak English. Jensen isn't the CEO of Nvidia because he used family's money to buy a company. He's a microchip designer that started his own company to develop new technology using his own skills.

Naive-Suit3916

some sort of news for IBM to keep going up?

sidslidkid

IBM woke up

That-Whereas3367

 *"The dotcom bubble did not affect established companies",* 100% false. Microsoft fell 58% and took 17 years to recover. IBM and Walmart both lost >30% and took more than a decade to recover. Intel, Cisco, Lucent , Citigroup and GE NEVER recovered

TheWayIAm313

Not a bad move. I’m weighted towards being too far down though, so selling like IBM right now (-1%) and floating into HOOD wouldn’t do too much to adjust my cost basis. If I start getting profit on IBM, then I might do that though. Hard to trust it’s not a falling knife too

Orange_Codex

The Wolfpack report exposed a literal scam. No data centre, no product, and the founders were previously banned from penny stocks for fraud. The only thing that *might* be worth banking on is the IBM contract, which Wolfpack didn't tackle. It is possible DataVault scammed IBM.

etTuPlutus

You have some incorrect assumptions about the dotcom era. The companies making the most money then were exactly the same situation as you described todaay. Established players with multiple products were making all the money by selling the services and hardware needed to create and access websites. Cisco, MCI, Microsoft, Lucent/AT&T, IBM, Intel, etc. Of the 20 most valuable companies in 1999, only AOL was a purely dotcom era company (and they were much more of an ISP/part of the infrastructure that gave people access to the web then vs today where they're just another click bait website). The actual dotcoms never came close to the valuation of those guys. Yahoo was the dotcom king and at its peak was worth maybe a fourth of what Cisco peaked at.

davidleo24

After growing my IRA 80% by going 100% on $GOOGL earlier this year, and then going 100% on $RIVN (because I thought it would be funny if I made money from the stock to buy one of their cars)... with timing that would raise some eyebrows in the SEC if, I am going 100% on $GTLB. I had a dream it was acquired by IBM (Red Hat). https://preview.redd.it/q5w1g34l0nzf1.png?width=928&format=png&auto=webp&s=5841d748b38249acb61bbb259a870967f007a404

InspectorRound8920

IBM about to lay off thousands.

rpez89

Good shout, always the best place to look for a balanced opinion. I’m sceptical of any company that boasts about patents. The financials are awful and IBM aren’t doing business with them, they are effectively just a customer of IBM using IBM’s watsonx.ai software, DVLT have positioned it as a “partnership”. Their website is full of buzzwords designed to make retail investors hard like Web 3.0, crypto, blockchain and AI - with no clarity on what they actually do. No Google Streetview for their head offices which is suss. Happy to watch from the sidelines hope it works out!

Due-Papaya-6217

They have begun the process of legal action against them. I really don’t think IBM would be doing business with them if it rang any truth. Has been debunked - go on the DVLT sub.

ethiopian_kid

Micron is up like 200% since 2000 lol, while you got in at a good time it’s a boomer stock like IBM and while the business is solid as a whole there’s no real growth story.

tastiefreeze

I sell the IBM portfolio of AI solutions, Automation solutions, and GRC solutions to companies

Previous-Jello-7486

Kramer it's at Harvard business school today, just call Quantum companies garbage in front of all the kids. It said " just as I spoke with Jensen, this tech is 10-15 years away " he added the only 2 real Quantum companies are IBM and Google. Qbts will keep having 3 millions $$$ quarters revenue for the next 5years with a 10 billion cap, run while you can

SlfImpr

**Overhyped but garbage Quantum stocks**: * IonQ * Rigetti * D\_Wave **Quantum stocks with real potential:** * $GOOG * $IBM * $MSFT * Infleqtion ($CCCX) * Quantinuum ($HON, i.e., Honeywell) * PsiQuantum *All of the good ones are challenging to invest in as quantum pureplay (except $CCCX which has real revenue and already received millions in US DoD funding).*

theLeastChillGuy

They were making actual profits during the dot-com bubble as well. Why do you think they weren't? During the dot-com bubble, the top 11 companies by market cap included Microsoft, Intel, Qualcom, Oracle, IBM, Dell & Cisco (others included non-tech sector companies like Exxon). All of these companies were making actual money. In 2000, Microsoft made +$9billion, Intel made +$10billion Every single company I just mentioned crashed more than 60% in the crash after the bubble.

vap0rtranz

Yup, yet few upvoted your reply. Anthropic, Perplexity, -- heck, even OpenAI if they aren't fully acquired my Microsoft -- will be in trouble. Anyone who'se spending a lot on marketing, ads, or R&D with a promise for huge payoffs. It seems naysayers didn't live through the Dotcom bubble. The concern was not Microsoft, or IBM, or even Yahoo, though it took heavy hits. The concern were venture capitol (VCs) that were throwing money into e-commerce who *promised* profitable websites, that snowballed into more stable companies overstretching. Companies that had products went too far into new, unprofitable ones and spent themselves into bankruptcy -- assuming increasing stocks would pay off. By 1999, we were deep into funny money valuations of many companies. It's crazy how many companies were affected that I remember from back then: Netscape, Egghead, Double-click, Excite.com, Pets.com (the original), Prodigy ISP, etc. The Nasdaq graph back then: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dot-com_bubble#/media/File:Nasdaq_Composite_dot-com_bubble.svg The Nasdaq index now: https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/%5EIXIC/ What I'm waiting for is an even steeper surge in prices, like happened in 1999. Perhaps there will be NO bubble because some pressure is already letting out the steam from moving valuations.

KC_Tlvdatsi

>Write your post again but instead of "Microsoft, Google, Nvidia, Meta" say "IBM, Microsoft, Cisco, Compaq, Intel, Oracle" and tell us again why that bubble won't be so bad. I think there should be a great deal of concern for all those existing products. It is the fact that these companies are actively cannibalizing their normal businesses/products to feed this AI mania. They're tossing out talent and expertise to use payroll for AI investment and moving development cycles to shoe-horning AI into their products to find a use case instead of product dev and innovation for their actual customers. All this is predicated on AI replacing the majority of staff and all those circular money contracts all being fulfilled and not abandoned half way through. If we exclude out these companies, the rest of the market doesn't look so great... now imagine the rest of these companies getting rid of everyone not C\* or physically handling the product in a way that can't be automated. That being said, I don't think this bubble will actually pop. Too much of the market is owned by either passive investment(indexes and such) that won't pull out and people who's net worth is tied to it. Musk isn't going to divest himself. Ellison isn't going to sell. Their net worths' are all tied into these stocks having value or being useful as collateral. the top 10% own about 93% of all stocks, with the top 1% owning approximately 54%. Forget banks, they're too big to fail. The inbred circles of these super wealthy won't pull out of these tech stocks. If anything, they'll see it as a discount and throw more at it. We're getting to a bifurcated economy, similar to the aristocracy of europe. lots of peasants just getting by and wealthy doing whatever they want with very few(if any) consequences.

skilliard7

>The big difference is that the companies today actually make money. Microsoft, Google, Nvidia, Meta they all have real products, billions in profits, and millions of users. Think of Google Maps, YouTube, Windows, Office, Android, Instagram etc. These are all solid products with billions in profits and massive user bases. Can you replace them? No. Will they go away anytime soon? Also no. Even if the AI trend slows down, these companies still have strong foundations and cash flow from their non-AI products. You could say the same about Microsoft, Intel, Cisco, IBM in the 90's. The danger isn't that MSFT/Google/Nvidia/Meta will go bankrupt. The danger is the AI startups that are massively unprofitable, that are renting cloud capacity from the biggest tech companies. The massive overbuild of capacity will result in lots of losses for cloud providers when demand from unprofitable startups wanes !remindme 5 years

Moron-Whisperer

More Indiafacation of IBM. 

AstorLarson

hahahahaha... oh.. wait you are serious... let me laugh harder... HAHAHAHAHAH! Seriously.... IBM is done... worked there and it has nothing to offer.

Untethered_GoldenGod

Lets go IBM unc still got it

purrmutations

Based on the people I knew when I worked there, they have more than thousands that deserve to be let go. So many underperforming low skilled workers that IBM hired in 2021

That-Whereas3367

Nobody can make money that way. The costs for vendors are INCREASING exponentially. Not falling. It will be a matter of who blinks first and cuts their losses. A few large companies will keep in house projects. Niche products will be developed for specialist use. But mainstream adoption will be glacial. For context IBM sold a mere 200K PC in the first year (1981-82). It took **30 years** for 50% of US households to have a PC.

SomeSamples

This has been IBM's M.O. for as long as I can remember. It is cyclical with them. Not unexpected but sucks for those workers. Especially in today's job market.

Ghost_Reborn416

What does IBM even do nowadays?

BosSF82

IBM to cut thousands of jobs in fourth quarter amid software focus

shadeptx

so if ur paying attention to the sector, these companies aren’t scams, but good luck competing with IBM and Google who are also big players in the space. if you really are looking for something undervalued though i genuinely believe that $CCCX once it merges with Infleqtion is like 1/5th of its fair value right now based on sales and forward P/E, its a quantum company that’s making money right now on quantum clocks and sensing, so its technology already has a use case that is ramping up in sales.

fredditf

$AMD | Advanced Micro Devices Q3’25 Earnings Highlights 🔹 Revenue: $9.25B (Est. $8.74B) 🟢; UP +36% YoY; +20% QoQ 🔹 Adj. EPS: $1.20 (Est. $1.17) 🟢; UP +30% YoY 🔹 CapEx: $258M (Est. $220M) 🔴 Q4’25 Guidance 🔹 Revenue: $9.3B–$9.9B (Est. $9.21B) 🟢; +25% YoY 🔹 Adj. Gross Margin: ~54.5% (Est. 54.5%) 🟢 🔹 Outlook doesn't include China MI308 shipment revenue Segment Highlights 🔹 Data Center: $4.3B; UP +22% YoY (strong EPYC & Instinct demand) 🔹 Client + Gaming: $4.0B; UP +73% YoY (record Ryzen, +181% Gaming) 🔹 Embedded: $857M; DOWN -8% YoY Other Metrics: 🔹 Adj. Operating Income: $2.24B (Est. $2.15B) 🟢; UP +30% YoY 🔹 Adj. Operating Margin: 24% (Est. 24.8%) 🟡 🔹 Adj. Gross Margin: 54%; Flat YoY Key Updates 🔹 Record quarterly revenue and free cash flow; no China GPU shipments included 🔹 New AI and compute partnerships: OpenAI (6GW GPU cluster), Oracle, Cisco, IBM, G42, Vultr, DigitalOcean 🔹 Introduced Helios rack-scale design and ROCm 7 software 🔹 Expanded Ryzen, EPYC, and Instinct product portfolios CEO Commentary – Dr. Lisa Su 🔸 “We delivered record revenue and profitability with broad-based demand across EPYC, Ryzen, and Instinct AI products.” 🔸 “Our strong Q4 outlook marks a clear step up in our growth trajectory as our compute and AI businesses scale rapidly.” CFO Commentary – Jean Hu 🔸 “Record free cash flow and disciplined execution reflect the strength of our leadership portfolio.” 🔸 “Investments in AI and high-performance computing are driving long-term growth and value creation.”

ShopperOfBuckets

Okay but what is the size of the total addressable market and how many years off is the company? Infleqtion's CEO went to GTC and said they estimate quantum will be practically useful at around 100 logical qubits and that they are at 12, which is a ways off. None of these pure quantum plays seem even close to a reasonable valuation and the hope is they will beat Google and IBM? RGTI's CEO owns 0 shares of the company he's running, the sector is just wild.

kaapooj

IBM qutting thousands of jobs -bloomberg

ObjectiveData9902

I'm a 40+ year veteran in the banking IT industry. It's clear the OP knows little about the computer industry. The IBM partnership with Datavault is no different than scale-up schemes run by Microsoft, Compaq and pretty much every other hardware company worldwide. Helping the little company is a business investment that ensure futures hardware sales (if and) when it becomes a bigger company. As an investor, you need to lose the emotional attachment with a particular stock as it's counterproductive and gets you nowhere. IMO, Datavault is quite a good long term investment. However, nothing wrong with dips like what's occuring with the stock right now. Reaching a consolidation point is healthy and also a buying opportunity for those who wish to increase their porfolio. Just like the recent peak is a selling opportunity. Holding a stock that is falling makes little sense until that company starts paying dividends. Best to lose the emotion. If you view your investment as long-term, better to just keep buying when the stock is down (I personally made 3 purchase of DVLT yesterday). The cult-like following of a stock and huge sentinent for a rise or fall is pure folly. Quietly buy whatever shares you can now. Sell some or all of them when the next peak is reached so you have the reserves to buy more on the next dip. Rinse and repeat and you will see your portfolio grow.

Crayon_Casserole

Nope. IBM has stated they'll have it sorted by 2032. IBM has never missed a deadline in its history. Enjoy your crypto passwords while you can.

greenpride32

Back in the mid-60's to early 70's, petroleum, aerospace, industrials really took off. Do you see any synergies there (just as there exists tech syneriges today)? That's what drove the economy. Air travel became accessible to all. Heavy machinery started replacing manual labor. Travel, agriculture, construction industries all disrupted. Today, tech drives the economy. Is there a business in existence that can't make use of AMZN or MSFT service offerings? Even your mom and pops and small business can use it. So SP500 is just going to pickup the winners and drop the losers regardless of sector. Within each growing sector are its own winners and losers. At some point in time IBM and T were top weights. Had you held those stocks individually in more recent times, you would have severely underperformed the index. Did that their fall from the top crash the index? Nope because overall SP500 revenue/profit/dividend distribution has increased over time - just carried by another cast of characters - hence your diversification.

Vast_Cricket

It has not been my favorite tech stock for several years bouncing \~$150 for sometime being overvalued. That AI hype I did opposite of what you did by reducing my positions. My cost basis is $38 and in another account $51. When Ellison was running actively he would release some big news followed by a disappointing earning. Companies like IBM will not even tried to hype up. They had AI on mainframe for 40 years and is into quantum computing for sometime. Low key but potentially explosive. Watson was one of the earlier AI enabled supercomputer not connected to internet. A powerful technology at the time. Orcl you do not know.

ai-moderator

#TLDR --- Ticker: DVLT Direction: Up Prognosis: Long on the stock, IBM already did the DD. Reasoning: DVLT is now a Platinum Partner with IBM, their highest and most strategic tier. This gives them top-level access to IBM's sales, engineering, and global network, signaling major validation and growth potential.

BlackberryJolly4830

IBM deal and so many patents its only up from here

hi65435

Not really, of course the goal was always to provide the fastest CPU. In the 90s only DEC Alpha made a CPU faster than Intel before becoming fully uneconomical Now in the 2020s there's AMD as mentioned. In other metrics Apple, Ampere and even IBM are better in other metrics like TDP or density

ProteinEngineer

Microsoft worked with IBM until they beat ibm.

Popular-Ad9044

Microsoft Apple Nvidia AMD Meta IBM Google Amazon Ycombinator

nyrixx

Yes there was, the term you are actually looking for is integrated photonics. Nvidia for example uses their acquisition of mellanox and its iteration into what nvlink became as a fabric, but it still isn't on chip. More recently companies like ayar labs and Intel have been making larger actual strides in the integration of the laser source being on/through the chips themselves. IBM has had numerous acquisitions and internal research groups around the tech for awhile.

DeterminedOne24

IBM best quantum stock

Bombstar10

Plus, while AI is a big boom for companies like Microsoft and Google, it is only one component of a broader portfolio with government and enterprise cloud, software suites, and other consumer products being adjacent to but not dependent on the bubble continuing to grow. With the PE and size of them I’d happily remain invested and ride things out with them or similar companies. Maybe they end up the way of IBM or others like that, less relevant, less rapid growth, but still investable.

Blaze3040

IBM isn’t investing money in DVLT . DVLT is “paying” ibm for their time and resources! That’s the partnership

te7037

Scilex owns some of $DVLT. It wants to use $DVLT's platform for its data analysis. $DVLT has a quantum computing element so that's why it partners with $IBM.

te7037

$5M partnership with $IBM and it recently bought a company worth $6M in revenue.

Odd_Onion_1591

I've almost double it this year via small but aggressive speculative investment. ASTS, NIbius my best performing investments. Also Turned 10k on IBM leaps into 50k.

jinty25

Exactly IBM extended the partnership with DVLT in September. They aren’t stupid. They need rigorous dd to work with IBM etc

Mother-Chipmunk2778

Yeah I agree with that, there’s only a few companies that will actually thrive in the AI boom. The data / compute companies and chips like amd and nvidia benefit the most now since they’re selling the “shovels” that huge scalers like meta, OpenAI, crwv, orcl etc need. I think smaller AI companies are essentially cooked since if they’re trying to compete at scale with the big boys. In terms of quantum, I think IBM and Google, and maybe infleqion are the only real companies in play. I think shrkeli is right that RGTI and QBTS and Ionq are way too overvalued when they don’t have a product or anything to show. Nuclear wise, I think OKLO is just ridiculously overvalued, multi billion valuation when expected revenue 10 years from now is in the millions, and that’s optimistic assuming they capture most of the market. Nuclear can’t even power a full scale data center, so it’s unseen how well it would actually work

riisenshadow92

I don’t get why people love these quantum plays, the best quantum plays are the big boys, these stocks have garbage fundamentals and price to sales ratios. If you want quantum just go google IBM Microsoft

Kyrptix

Long quantum. Ionq, RGTI and qbts. IBM increased much of their research towards quantum and have even started getting increased quantum contracts for things like finance and anomaly detection. So the practical application space for the above companies are expanding for sure. Similarly with Nvidia showing increased interest and even building a platform, which feels like early day CUDA for AI, i.e cementing themselves as the platform for quantum research and applications. So with leaders in both fields increasing focus, I expect smaller firms to also benefit and see increased exposure. Especially those like QBTS which has been strongly application focused for some time. Additionally, with the current administration showing an interest in acquiring quantum stocks/ taking a stake in it, shows how valuable these tech advances are from the defense and national security perspective.

jchong326

Forget lawyers, Nate just needs to reframe every point presented by Wolfpack Research. You can organize facts to tell any story you want. Even though I was invested since .43, with every recent DVLT news that came out made me have a lot of questions. Wolfpack's report at least gave answers to my questions. I've seen how companies grow and stupid things companies will do to have somewhat of a conscience to say as fact to make investors seem as if they're growing. I don't think DVLT is a fake company, I do think they wanted investors to believe they were growing faster than they really were. Was it to pump the stock only to dump it later on? probably, but its hard to say that this company, that has millions of dollars of expenses, especially a $23M contract with IBM, is a scam.

BallsHardest

Now imagine needing 8 floppy discs to install an 8-bit chess game on your IBM PC.

Ok-Mongoose-7870

What exactly is AI, enlighten me please :-) Is it just fast computation and ability to crunch vast amount of data ? Did SuperComputers not exist 10-20-30 years back ? may be they were as big as a room and exclusive to places like MIT or IBM or whatever - but humans have had the ability to process vast amount of data and faster too for a while. Heck Cancer is a holy grail of a dream... Has AI cured even common-cold so far ? or Flu or Covid ? Its been 5 years since AI burst on the scene ? Does AI not have the ability to crunch data for those ? I will wait for AI to cure Flu before it sets its sight on Cancer.

BeerNirvana

IBM can also fall to a scammer - you'd think they do the DD but this example proves not all do: >Charlie Javice and Olivier Amar face up to decades in prison for falsifying Frank’s customer numbers amid its $175 million sale to JPMorgan Chase. https://www.bankingdive.com/news/frank-founder-chief-growth-officer-convicted-of-fraud/743991/

Dragon-rules

Why would IBM throw away money if DVLT did not have any fundamentals. Big companies have their own way to invest witj necessery approvals. 

Pretty_Sharp

My 15 minute research into DVLT is interesting. Essentially it's 70 patents, IBM partnership, and new HQ and AI center vs Wolfpacks claims of no product, inactive blockchain and paid promotion to pump for dilution. Not sure what to make of it. Analyst have a $7 price target consensus and moderate buy.