IBM

mtnrnnr802

I feel like an old man. I bought IBM leaps today.

PenStreet3684

IBM study shows that 99% of America’s 1.7 million typists will become obsolete with the advent of personal computers. ~1950 Otis company predicts that 99% of the elevator operators will become obsolete in the next decade. -1945 Don’t get me started with pin setters and switchboard operators. What is your favorite occupation that you would restore or protect? Gas jockeys?

team_3spread

>The index treats the 151 million workers as individual agents, each tagged with skills, tasks, occupation and location. It maps more than 32,000 skills across 923 occupations in 3,000 counties, then measures where current AI systems can already perform those skills. ... >The index is not a prediction engine about exactly when or where jobs will be lost, the researchers said. Instead, it’s meant to give a skills-centered snapshot of what today’s AI systems can already do, and give policymakers a structured way to explore what-if scenarios before they commit real money and legislation. Per [the article.](https://www.cnbc.com/2025/11/26/mit-study-finds-ai-can-already-replace-11point7percent-of-us-workforce.html) They are not stating that 11.7% of the workforce can or will be replaced, that are stating that 11.7% of the skills they have identified in the labor market can be done by AI, although they don't define what they mean by AI in the article so I assume this is just LLMs? The author just seems to be taking things out of context for the sake of making an article sound more exciting. Even [the actual paper published by the Iceberg team](https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.25137) does not state "11.7% of the labor market". They focus entirely on 'skills' that are identified as being core elements of different sectors of the labor market and what current technology can perform. Per the Iceberg paper: >Beyond technology occupations, AI capabilities extend to cognitive and administrative work. Tools developed for coding demonstrate technical capability in document processing, financial analysis, and routine administrative tasks - illustrating how capabilities demonstrated in technology contexts translate to other domains. Some adoption is already occurring: IBM reduced HR staff through AI automation \[[26](https://arxiv.org/html/2510.25137v1#bib.bib26)\], Salesforce froze hiring for non-technical roles \[[29](https://arxiv.org/html/2510.25137v1#bib.bib29)\], and McKinsey projects that 30% of financial tasks could be automated by 2030 \[[15](https://arxiv.org/html/2510.25137v1#bib.bib15)\]. >We apply the same skill-overlap methodology to administrative, financial, and professional service occupations beyond the technology sector. The Iceberg Index for digital AI shows values averaging 11.7%—five times larger than the 2.2% Surface Index. Unlike technology-sector exposure concentrated in coastal hubs, this broader skill overlap is geographically distributed. South Dakota, North Carolina, and Utah show higher Index values than California or Virginia. >Industrial states illustrate this pattern. Tennessee (11.6%) and Ohio (11.8%) show substantial Index values driven by administrative and coordination roles within factories and supply chains. These white-collar functions show technical exposure that maybe invisible to policymakers while states focus largely on physical automation. These patterns reveal where skill overlap extends beyond current visible adoption, though actual workforce impacts will depend on adoption decisions, quality thresholds, and organizational constraints (Figure [6](https://arxiv.org/html/2510.25137v1#S5.F6)(a)). The talk entirely of 'skills'. not replacing a certain percentage of the labor market. Just read the paper. The study does not at all discuss the infrastructure or energy requirements to facilitate the operation of LLMs (or other ML-systems) at the scale required to mass-replace labor. The study does not discuss or investigate whether or not current LLMs or other related technologies are actually capable of *replacing people.* None of this to say that the paper does not have merit, but the article (and this post) are undoubtedly blowing the information in the paper way of of proportion.

EvolvingDior

How is IBM going to squander their lead in quantum computing like they did with AI? Need this question asked during the next earnings call.

EveryoneForever

The leader of project genesis is x-IBM.

ThreeTonChonker

Games are a complete failure, XBox is a laughingstock, and are dragging down the brand. Offices are going the way of the dodo so they’ll struggle to sell corporate licenses. Windows 11 transition was a joke. Microsoft is a dinosaur that’s likely to slowly descend into a Xerox or IBM over the next couple decades.

funkdizzletron

Loaded on GOOGL and IBM call. Wish I woulda unloaded my NVDA puts this morning.

Ilikemygirltitties

From Claude Opus 4.5 🔍 CRITICAL ANALYSIS: REDDIT GOLD THESIS VERDICT: PARTIALLY VALID THESIS WITH SIGNIFICANT EXAGGERATIONS AND OMISSIONS ## ✅ CLAIMS THAT ARE **VERIFIED & ACCURATE** **1. Interest Payments at $970B in FY2025** Interest payments on the national debt totaled $970 billion, surpassing spending on national defense . This is the **third-largest federal government expenditure** behind Social Security and Medicare. **2. Central Bank Gold Buying at Record Levels** Central banks have accumulated over 1,000t of gold in each of the last three years, up significantly from the 400-500t average over the preceding decade. The claim that central banks are buying gold “at rates not seen in decades” is **TRUE**. **3. Gold Now Exceeds US Treasuries in Central Bank Reserves** Gold’s share of global reserves climbed to about 18% in 2024, up sharply from mid-2010s levels. According to the IMF, gold has overtaken U.S. Treasuries as the world’s dominant reserve asset. **4. CBO Projection of Rising Interest Costs** The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects that if current laws generally remain the same, net interest payments will total $13.8 trillion over the next decade, rising from an annual cost of $1.0 trillion in 2026 to $1.8 trillion in 2035. The Reddit post said $2.6T by 2035 - CBO says $1.8T. **Reddit OVERSTATED by ~44%.** **5. Gold Hit $4,000+ in 2025** Gold was trading at $4,121 per ounce at 10:05 a.m. Eastern Time today. Gold reached an all-time high of $4379.22 on 17.10.2025. Up **~57% YTD** - remarkable performance. **6. PHYS Tax Treatment vs GLD** GLD’s gold is treated as a “collectible,” and gains on holding GLD are taxable at 28%. Special federal income tax rules apply to holders of the Sprott Physical Gold Trust, because it is classified as a Passive Foreign Investment Corporation (PFIC) by the IRS. If a U.S. non-corporate holder makes a timely QEF election each year by filing IRS Form 8621 with their federal income tax return, capital gains will be taxed at either 15% or 20%, depending on your income level. This is **TRUE for US investors** ----- ## ⚠️ CLAIMS THAT ARE **MISLEADING OR EXAGGERATED** **1. The “$25.8 Trillion Debt Wall” Figure is Contested** The Reddit post claims 9.5T + 7.3T + 9.5T = $25.8T maturing in 2026-2028. The actual data shows: Over half of U.S. debt owned by the public (more than $14 trillion) will mature in the next 3 years. Most likely this debt will need to be refinanced. So the number is closer to **$14 trillion**, not $25.8 trillion. The Reddit post appears to have double-counted or used inflated projections. **2. Janet Yellen “Intentionally” Flooded Short-Term Debt** Yellen said Roubini’s argument “suggests a strategy that is intended to ease financial conditions, and I can assure you 100% that there is no such strategy. We have never, ever discussed anything of the sort.” By late 2023, TBAC recommended much higher issuance of bills because the dearth of new issuance had resulted in a shortage. Bills were yielding an attractive 5.5%. Deposits into money market funds ballooned from $4,600 billion in early 2023 to $6,000 billion by early 2024. Money market funds are big buyers of bills. The “intentional manipulation” narrative is **politically charged and debunked by Bloomberg Opinion**. The strategy had defensible economic rationale (strong bill demand, expected Fed rate cuts). **3. “We Have 2 Choices: Deflation Crash or Inflation Melt-Up”** This is a **FALSE DICHOTOMY**. Sophisticated economies have more tools: debt restructuring, gradual monetization, GDP growth, taxation adjustments, entitlement reforms, currency devaluation, etc. The binary framing is fearmongering. **4. China Taiwan “2026 Invasion” Certainty** The Reddit post states China’s army “must be capable of invasion by 2026” as fact. This is speculative intelligence assessment, not confirmed policy. Military capability ≠ military intent. The timeline has been debated and extended multiple times. ----- ## ❌ CLAIMS THAT ARE **WRONG OR MISLEADING** **1. “BBB Showed Zero Interest in Dealing with Debt”** The Build Back Better Act was primarily a spending bill, not a debt reduction bill. Conflating the two is intellectually dishonest. Also, recent tariff revenue of $202B showed some deficit reduction efforts. **2. “Official Inflation Numbers Are a Lie”** The Reddit post cites ShadowStats - a fringe website that uses outdated 1980s methodology. While CPI has limitations, mainstream economists don’t take ShadowStats seriously. The methodology changes were made for legitimate reasons (hedonic adjustments for quality improvements, geometric weighting to account for substitution behavior). **3. “Nifty Fifty Crashed 50-80%”** While true that some crashed, **many Nifty Fifty stocks (like Disney, IBM, McDonald’s) went on to deliver exceptional long-term returns**. The comparison conveniently ignores survivors. Cherry-picking. ----- ## 🎯 WHAT THE REDDIT POST **OMITS** (Critical Omissions) **1. US Dollar Remains World Reserve Currency** Despite all the doom, the USD is still 58% of global reserves. De-dollarization is slow - decades, not years. **2. Gold Generates Zero Cash Flow** Gold is not a productive asset. It doesn’t generate dividends, earnings, or rental income. It’s a hedge, not a growth investment. From 1971 to 2024, traditional stocks averaged 10.7% annual returns, while gold averaged 7.9%. **3. Gold Already Had Its Run** Gold is up 57.11% compared to the same time last year. The thesis would’ve been brilliant **a year ago**. Buying now is buying AFTER the move, not before. **4. Central Bank Buying Could Slow** Turkey flipped from buyer to seller in mid‑2024 to manage its domestic gold market. Central bank gold purchases are rate‑insensitive: purchases averaged 450 t/yr in the high‑yield 1990s versus almost zero net buying when rates were near zero (2001‑09). ----- ## THE UNCOMFORTABLE TRUTH The Reddit post reads like it was written **after** gold’s run to justify a position the author already holds (“Position: basically entirely PHYS”). This is classic **confirmation bias** - finding reasons to support an existing belief. A year ago, this thesis would have been brilliant. Today, it’s rationalizing buying at the top.

photocopy_ypoc

# Collaborators Albemarle AMD Amazon Web Services Anthropic Applied Materials Atomic Canyon AVEVA Cerebras Chemspeed Cisco Collins Aerospace ComEd Cornelis Networks Critical Materials Recycling Dell Technologies Emerald Cloud Lab EPRI Esri FutureHouse GE Aerospace Google HPE Hugging Face IBM ISO New England Kitware LILA Micron Microsoft MP Materials New York Creates Niron Magnetics Nokia NVIDIA Nusano OLI Systems OpenAI for Government Phoenix Tailings PMT Critical Metals Qubit Quantinuum RadiaSoft Ramaco RTX Sambanova Scale AI Semiconductor Industry Association Siemens Synopsys TdVib Tennessee Valley Authority xLight

BNA-mod

This post sounds like every bear who thought the PC was a useless toy or those who thought IBM would go out of business in a few years. If OP was half as smart as he think he is, he would be getting paid half a billion by one of the big corporations for his opinions. This is not a stock post. It’s an op ed.

Notivan123

I was getting clowned on with IBM at 235. I believe in the turnaround 😼

c-digs

You don't quite understand how the process works. Compounds have to go through multi-year clinical trials that involve global coordination between researchers, clinical trial sites, and vendors (like we were) that provide technology platforms for running these trials. Trials have a LOT of regulatory complexity as the process has to abide by at least 3 main regulatory bodies (FDA, EMEA, and Japan's PMDA). The project managers are staying on top of these regulatory changes, managing inbound as well as outbound audits, requirements for these systems between stakeholders, and ongoing support of hundreds of thousands of clinical trial staff at sites all around the world. A big trial can have tens of thousands of subjects and thousands of sites. There is no way trials of the scope we were running would be possible without this middle layer while still maintaining regulatory adherence, ensuring data quality, and traceability in the event of future lawsuits or regulatory action. This is extremely bearish for Novo in the same way that shedding scientists was bearish for IBM, Compaq, and HP because the purpose of pharmaceutical company is one part research, one part marketing, and one part navigating the regulatory and process complexity of getting new treatments to market.

Nefarious_AI_Agent

Gotta love IBM

Stubtronics101

At this point AI is just a necessary infrastructure that any leading company is gonna have to have if they want to remain competitive. It's not a question of how can we profit from this it's a question of we are currently very profitable and have boatloads of cash we can invest. Is this the thing that will keep us competitive? Or do we just do the same old thing like Intel, Kodak, or IBM.

Ctofaname

Because imo the startups have no chance. Quantum is not something that a start up have the resources or the PHDs to figure out. Playing them is pure gambling. Im saying there is a bubble in the start ups for sure. They'll all fail.. but the real players will get it done. Google and IBM.

RedditJerkPolice

They air drop their Dream Bowl meme token if you purchase the 24 and hold thru 25 of Nov. Investors been digesting that and also a lot of contracts/partnerships with a few to name.. •IBM •Triton Geo •US Gov •$SCLX Very nice set up. Wolverine posted an article slandering Datavault, which stepped up within hours of the article. That? Mixed in with a great q3 and amazing set up for 2026. Tokenization is going to huge with real assets.

xansabar

IBM a sneaky giant

Daxelol

Guesstimation - 10 years. IBM and some other companies have working quantum computers right now, and while that is cool, they have to scale those computers up to where we are now AND they have to problem solve complex physics issues at every step. They have really cool, functional, "small scale" computers right now. Seeing a fully functional quantum computer will still take years of R&D.

AcademicStandard3701

IBM yes baby 🤑 🤑

yatruthordare

IBM is up…

Lopsided-Magician-36

Some dude did it while Kohls and banked on cheap 1DTES I saw some IBM calls that went from $5 to $1200 in two hours

Lopsided-Magician-36

Worth it. I fucked up last month I saw IBM calls dip after earnings from $600 to $5 then they ripped right back up to $1200 smh I though about loading up too

Cswizzy

IBM

spellbadgrammargood

I feel everything with this AI hype already existed. IBM's Watson (over 10 years ago!) was able to obtain accurate answers but these tech bros just made it into a chatbot. Text summaries already existed like reddit's article summary bot. Generative AI is just face swaps (like from porn) with body parts instead.

One-Cicada-7784

I see his argument about AI companies overstating earnings because they are depreciating the infrastructure over too long a period... fine... that's something to beat Sam Altman and OpenAI over the head with... but how is this anything but stellar news for NVidia and other hardware vendors? Gee... my hardware that I thought was competitive for five years is now obsoleted (by whom? NVidia!) in just two to three years... SOOOO... I HAVE TO BUY THE LATEST, GREATEST NVIDIA HW TO STAY COMPETITIVE! Why is NVidia crashing on this bozo's prognostications? There is still going to be tremendous demand for their hardware for at least the next year... likely for many many more. NVidia is a huge ship. It will take a VERY long time for it to sink. I was at Sun Microsystems in the mid-1990's. I saw then that it was going to sink - I thought in a couple to three years at the most... It takes WAY longer for a large company to sink than anyone on the inside can forecast. The old stuff is still useful for years - case-in-point: Jensen's argument that the Cuda framework has been keeping 6-year-old hardware running to this day... so resell time on that at a discount to smaller players... the bigger players need to keep building out the new stuff. That is not going to change any year soon. This idea that we have achieved the most computing anyone would ever need and we can just throw in the towel now, reminds me of the famous story of Thomas J. Watson (of IBM and DNA fame) with respect to his comments on the ENIAC... God! How many of these things will the world ever need? 5? Maybe 6? GUESS AGAIN!

Affectionate-Idea690

Yes true.,but one bank used the ultimate AI trading one...the HSBC AI Powered US Equity Index (AiPEX), which uses IBM Watson's AI to analyze vast amounts of data—including news, market conditions, and social media sentiment—to identify potential high-growth stocks for investment strategies. Also replaced AI with real customer service as well ..which is annoying as fuk

WisdomPimp

IBM staying green in a sea of red 🥰

LocoMotoNYC

What would you buy on this dip? Take your pick and yes one is not like the other. IBM vs. GOOGL vs. NVDA vs. TJX

beacondelta

Good topic. I was wondering if most ppl realize how vulnerable cryptos will be with the eventual combined potential of AI and Quantum to decrypt stuff. Some ppl are saying not for another 5 years, and maybe the slow development is why Quantum stocks are sliding today? I don't know. I do think about how new tech seems to just appear out of no where these past few years. Can anyone really trust forecasts anymore? Even with Quantum, all that has to happen is Alphabet or IBM making a breakthrough announcement and boom, the single players (QBTS, IONQ, RGTI) are at risk. Yeah, admittedly I was considering the BTC dip today, but I just don't have the stomach for it. Uggg - its horrifying see the losses today.

pink_ego_box

None of the "quantum computing" pure players have a viable product nor will they have it. They're all pumping, diluting and selling their stock and have too few capital and employees to really develop a viable product at any point. That's Rigetti, D-wave, QBTS and especially QUBT. The only company with viable products is CCCX and it's not really for computing. The only companies who have an opportunity at a real breakout are Google and IBM

GravyMealTeam6

So did you invest in IBM cause they made PC's instead of MSFT back in the day since no hardware, no software?

xShiftfaced

I don’t think you understand how long the market can keep going at this rate. There’s going to be corrections but the dip is going to get bought. The market has evolved from 10 years ago and even further evolved from your grandfather’s market. I also work for a large company that uses IBM for its data centers and is far behind the innovative curve. Jensen did not exaggerate on the demand and forced demand to keep a competitive edge. Also, the fed doesn’t seem concerned otherwise they’d be cutting and their job is to be independent from fiscal policy and protect Main Street. The next actual bear market will be short lived. Retail investor numbers are growing exponentially and access to the market is easier than ever.

dukerustfield

This has happened since there was a market. Exxon. IBM-big blue. I’m not sure if there was a period where a company or two didn’t dictate the mood of the market. People are looking for signs. Signs it’s a bubble. Signs the bubble is going to contract. Nvidia’s earnings show there’s still gas in the tank. Bubble or not there’s still money to be had. And that’s what investors do.

Basat098

I apologize for the length! You’re assuming “nobody is earning money” in AI because you’re fixated on early-stage players like OpenAI and CoreWeave, but you’re ignoring where the actual profits are accruing: the infrastructure layer. NVIDIA’s data center revenue is up over 400% year-over-year and generated over $30 billion in net income in the last four quarters, more profit than Intel, AMD, and IBM combined. AWS, Azure, and Google Cloud are reporting double digit growth in AI-driven cloud workloads, with AWS alone adding roughly $15 billion in annualized revenue from AI services last year. Meta’s AI capex is already showing up in the P&L through Reels optimization and ad-targeting efficiency, driving \~25% year-over-year revenue growth, its strongest in a decade. These are not hypothetical earnings; they’re realized profits from AI deployment. On CoreWeave specifically, the earnings you cited don’t prove a bubble, they prove the opposite. Revenue doubled YoY from \~$584M to \~$1.36B, and adjusted EBITDA hit \~$838M with a 61% margin. The headline net loss is driven by interest expense and massive capex for data centers, GPUs, and power contracts, exactly what hyper-growth infrastructure looks like in its buildout phase (same story we saw with AWS, TSMC, and every major hyper scaler early on). The $55.6B backlog is not “made-up revenue”; it’s locked-in multi-year contracts with Meta, OpenAI, hyperscalers, and enterprises, i.e., committed future cash flows. Their \~$1B+ quarterly revenue reflects how fast they can deliver capacity, not how much demand exists, if they had more GPUs and power, the backlog would convert faster. Backlog far exceeding current revenue is normal in constrained industries like semiconductors and aerospace. The broader claim that “nobody is paying for AI” is simply false. Fortune 500 AI budgets are up something like 60–120% YoY, with individual companies spending from tens of millions to over a billion annually on copilots, inference APIs, fine-tuning, and data integration. These contracts are not $500–$1000 retail subs; they’re $50k–$20M enterprise deals. The money isn’t coming from retail speculation, it’s coming from businesses integrating AI into productivity, automation, CX, and analytics. Profit pools today sit at the compute, cloud, and enterprise layer, not necessarily the flashy consumer apps you’re focusing on. A bubble is when revenue is imaginary and demand collapses the moment capital tightens; here, revenue is real, demand is accelerating, and the bottleneck is supply (GPUs, power, data centers), not customers. That’s classic early cycle industrial scaling, not a bubble.

Business_Raisin_541

You mean that guy who endorse IBM? Why hasn't IBM become part of Magnificient 7?

Maximum_Peak_2242

The thing about IBM is - certain applications (e.g. transaction fraud assessment) just don't scale horizontally. So the approach of AWS / GCP which is to keep splitting a problem in half and throwing commodity hardware at it doesn't work. And this is where IBM's huge mainframes still pretty much have a moat.

Ok_Cry7572

They invited a lot of people to the Mango-Saudi dinner today, look at the guest invite list: Jeremy Allaire – CEO, Circle Cristiano Amon – CEO, Qualcomm Brian Armstrong – CEO, Coinbase Marc Beckman – CEO, DMA United Marc Benioff – CEO, Salesforce Charles Cascarilla – CEO, Paxos Tim Cook – CEO, Apple Michael Dell – CEO, Dell Technologies Jensen Huang – CEO, Nvidia Vimal Kapur – CEO, Honeywell Alex Karp – CEO, Palantir Arvind Krishna – CEO, IBM Kris Marszalek – CEO, Crypto.com (U.S.-based business presence despite being non-U.S. nationality) Bill McDermott – CEO, SoftwareNow (as listed) Sanjay Mehrotra – CEO, Micron Technology Elon Musk – CEO, Tesla Kelly Ortberg – CEO, Boeing Chuck Robbins – CEO, Cisco Lisa Su – CEO, AMD Vlad Tenev – CEO, Robinhood Markets Eric Yuan – CEO, Zoom Greg Brockman – President, OpenAI (executive) David Sacks – Trump's AI & Crypto Czar (executive role) Bill Ackman – CEO, Pershing Square Capital Management Mary Barra – CEO, General Motors Brendan Bechtel – CEO, Bechtel Larry Culp – CEO, GE Aerospace David Ellison – CEO, Paramount Global William Clay Ford Jr. – Executive Chairman, Ford Motor Jane Fraser – CEO, Citigroup Charles S. Hallab – CEO, U.S.–Saudi Business Council Phebe Novakovic – CEO, General Dynamics Scott O’Neil – CEO, LIV Golf Ross Perot Jr. – U.S. businessman/executive (Chairman of Hillwood) Stephen Schwarzman – CEO, Blackstone Jeffrey Sprecher – CEO, Intercontinental Exchange Scott Strazik – CEO, GE Vernova James Taiclet – CEO, Lockheed Martin Jim Umpleby – CEO, Caterpillar Kathy Warden – CEO, Northrop Grumman Mike Wirth – CEO, Chevron

Popular_Tension_5788

IBM will disappear by being fragmented into many smaller companies. They are far from being the giant they once were.

Classic_Acanthaceae2

They did not started as a scam! Actually they build a great DBs that actually was leveraged by SAP. They set the ground for the monster, just like IBM did with Microsoft at their time. Oracle had a great team of developers and a great sales team

Classic_Acanthaceae2

We are still years behind to see quantum computing but that’s what actually will transform the electric needs to upkeep AI. Many will tell me I’m crazy but IBM is ahead on the topic and will transform the market just as they did in the 90s with eBusiness and again in the 2010s with Watson. Their problem is they are really bad at capitalizing rather that their huge amount of patents

Xelonima

I mean there are century old tech companies there, like IBM, no reason for Alphabet to not be

andyfitz

To agree (and I don’t hold any GOOG) I kind of think that it’s a safe bet against any perceived bubble. They have great R&D. Tight grip on the internet. And a super malleable advertising business. And that’s before you consider how well their AI push has been going. To me it feels like Microsoft or IBM will break ground on something like Quantum but never monetise at as well as Google is positioned to . Complete speculation. Thoughts are my own and all that

2020Macthedog

I really do not have a clue how people thought back then (I read some of your other comments and understand what you are asking). I think one clue is looking at some old sayings. Like 60/40. Assume that means most would have 40% in bonds. Then you would most likely be trusting in experts back then so I would guess the portfolio would be mostly big cap names like IBM, GM, GE, US Steel etc etc. And your example of a Rock Star is a loser! Trust me, by 67 they were all high AF. No clue yet if the riches would last and focused on the moment! I lived it...

HBAR_10_DOLLARS

The HBAR ETF, $HBR governed by global enterprises like Google, IBM, and Dell, it's the leading public crypto network for mass enterprise adoption

william_tupinio

IBM: Quantum computing

rahul91105

Yeah public companies who have invested a ton in AI will lose and so would the private companies. CEOs would try to pivot/change the narrative. Shareholders would be angry and demand reduction in AI spending. New companies would emerge, leaving behind these companies. So the main question is would Google turn into IBM if the AI bubble bursts ?

zerking_off

IBM is still a company, Dell is for sure

LiquefactionAction

Yeah exactly. If you ever get the chance to stay at Ibiza, Sorrento, Cinque Terra, hang out in Milan or Reykjavik,, etc you'll meet so many of these failson and trust fund or just guys who invented some DOS software to process some obscure tax in the 1980s and sold to IBM for millions of dollars and basically haven't worked in years or decades and never will have to.

Rav_3d

IBM

Necessary-Actuator26

With how nascent the quantum computing industry is, I really personally wouldn't put any consistent amount of money into anything aside from IBM/Google. While they may not end up being the industry leader in 10-15 years time should a breakthrough occur, they were early enough and are diversified enough to weather anything thrown at them, unlike the majority of the recent quantum stocks

canadiandancer89

IBM is a fantastic example of this. Even in the "AI" space right now. IBM is watching OpenAI, Google, Facebook all squabble for the general consumer market. Meanwhile IBM is quietly working with large business and enterprise customers. I liken IBM to a Power Plant and Power Grid system. Basically, in a cannot fail position while everyone else is the factories and houses using that system.

doubledown830

VMware... Broadcom raped and pillaged it. Also, IBM will be pieced off as well.

greaper007

They kind of were though. In fact, I remember a movie from the 50s where women who worked in an office as researchers were fighting against a new IBM mainframe.

notseelen

yeah, I think it's gonna be tough. I will say, the argument of "it's big, so it can't get bigger" was already made before it jumped another 50% the past year...but _eventually_ it'll hold true I have a small investment (one paycheck) in them and I'm up ~70%. I planned to leave it for the long haul, I'm assuming there will be challenges with this, but if I had been investing 10 years ago, I would have bought NVDA then. I've always liked the company, rock solid parts and programming, and their leadership is second to none basically, I think Jensen Huang has found a way to place Nvidia directly at the center of like four revolutions in the past 20 years...they now have more R&D money than.... perhaps any company (maybe Bell or IBM had more?), so I'm just thinking they're gonna have something absolutely knockout in 10-20 years for quantum and whatever comes after that I am a beginner to individual stock though and I really just buy indexes. I don't trust my instincts enough to sell (as I'd have to know what to buy), so I am more of a "hold" than a "buy"

xynix_ie

I've been walking through data centers and working in them since the mid 90s. I was responsible for backup and I had a couple cool tools to use. One was a giant robot on a track. The 3495 by IBM. So when I say they haven't much changed, I personally feel they haven't much changed. I was in the most advanced data centers at the time, backing up terabytes! I've been in data storage ever since and still walk through the most advanced data centers in the world. They're just a LOT bigger now. My first data center that held all the credit information for all the people in the country was in half a buildings basement. It was replicated to a literal closet at another facility 20 miles away. Tapes were shipped offsite daily in a small box. Anyhow, that's just been my experience. Ask the mainframe guys about earlier times.

Kintobe

$DVLT for web3 & tokenisation ez. 70 patents, partnership with IBM, bullish ceo. And trading at just below 2 dollars is what id go for

Therex26

Remember when he bought IBM or OXY? Wait

artbystorms

IBM has done surprisingly well for me though I guess they aren't that small, same goes for BROS, the Dutch Bros coffee chain.

CartGentleman

🥇ATCH - earnings call yesterday - profitable - run don’t walk + bank acquisition 🥈MBOT - The Tesla Of Robotic Surgery WITH FDA APPROVAL 🥉DVLT - not profitable, heavily backed with IBM & loaded with patents (my sleeper stock which can be volatile depending on earnings on Monday) Let me know what yall think because I’m tired of bots spamming for pump & dump Pennie’s

ImmodestPolitician

MSFT is the IBM of the 2020s. CTO can't get fired for picking MSFT. I met Balmer once. Funny story I won't tell.

JohnnyFartmacher

Not that I think it adds much value at the moment, but a leader in quantum computing as well. I believe they are #2 in patents behind IBM. If there is a commercial market for quantum, Google is in good position.

AutisticMisandrist

After 2000's he's like a child lost in the clouds, he bought and sold randomly a bunch of tech stocks like a total noob, he bought like IBM and Oracle 10 years ago and then he fumbled the bag shortly after because he didnt know what the fuck he's doing.

ItCouldBeSpam

AI so hype even Buffet buying Google. Has he ever bought any "tech" besides Apple and dinosaurs like IBM?

HaveTwoBananas

Buffet buying IBM next

SlfImpr

Infleqtion ($CCCX) currently on sale - the only pure play Quantum worth considering other than Google, IBM, etc. >\-- Infleqtion CEO, Matt Kinsella said that computing is not the only product coming from quantum technologies >\-- There's a wide range of other products, including quantum sensors, quantum clocks, RF antennas, gravimeters, and different types of inertial sensing equipment >\-- Citing McKinsey’s research, the executive said Infleqtion’s total addressable market (TAM) is about $160 billion >He said Infleqtion holds the record for commercial qubits at 1600. “These are physical qubits, but what really matters in quantum computing are logical qubits. And logical qubits are error-corrected physical qubits.” >Kinsella said the U.S. government is Infleqtion’s biggest customer and the company is constantly in talks with the government. “The topic of equity is brought up from time to time, and so I think, you know, we will continue to do a lot of business with the U.S. government, and those conversations will play out as they play out.” >Kinsella said **government accounts for more than 50% of Infleqtion’s revenue, with the Department of Defense (DoD) and government-run energy grids included in this category. The company also sells its clocks to non-governmental customers and academic institutions**. Source: Link in comments

SlfImpr

Infleqtion ($CCCX) currently on sale - the only pure play Quantum worth considering other than Google, IBM, etc. >\-- Infleqtion CEO, Matt Kinsella said that computing is not the only product coming from quantum technologies >\-- There's a wide range of other products, including quantum sensors, quantum clocks, RF antennas, gravimeters, and different types of inertial sensing equipment >\-- Citing McKinsey’s research, the executive said Infleqtion’s total addressable market (TAM) is about $160 billion >He said Infleqtion holds the record for commercial qubits at 1600. “These are physical qubits, but what really matters in quantum computing are logical qubits. And logical qubits are error-corrected physical qubits.” >Kinsella said the U.S. government is Infleqtion’s biggest customer and the company is constantly in talks with the government. “The topic of equity is brought up from time to time, and so I think, you know, we will continue to do a lot of business with the U.S. government, and those conversations will play out as they play out.” >Kinsella said **government accounts for more than 50% of Infleqtion’s revenue, with the Department of Defense (DoD) and government-run energy grids included in this category. The company also sells its clocks to non-governmental customers and academic institutions**. Source: Link in comments

due_opinion_2573

I would suggest this article for your viewing pleasure. Buy it. Hold it. Love it. OK there is a slight delay but this is going to be the new IBM of the 80's. [https://ecs.syracuse.edu/about/news/micron-technologies-announces-plans-to-invest-100-billion-to-build-a-semiconductor-fabrication-facility-near-syracuse](https://ecs.syracuse.edu/about/news/micron-technologies-announces-plans-to-invest-100-billion-to-build-a-semiconductor-fabrication-facility-near-syracuse) [https://www.syracuse.com/micron/2025/11/micron-chip-factories-in-upstate-ny-delayed-by-two-to-three-years-company-says.html](https://www.syracuse.com/micron/2025/11/micron-chip-factories-in-upstate-ny-delayed-by-two-to-three-years-company-says.html)

EightFolding

Here's one way I'm thinking about them and their prospects and revenue, best to worst in my current analysis: 1. NBIS - $3+ billion deal with META $17+ billion deal w/ MSFT 2. IREN - $9 billion contract with MSFT 3. APLD - serving a 'major hyperscaler' customer, and CoreWeave 4. CRWV - serving OpenAI, META, IBM, partnership with NVDA 5. CORZ - what's next after termination of CRWV deal?... 6. GLXY - primary contract is with CoreWeave So I think everyone interested in this space should consider the top three, at least, and you can gamble on the other three if you'd like. I am, with small bets. If I end up selling 4-6 I'll put that into 1-3.

MaybeTheDoctor

Maybe it can run the IBM AI, Watson

HBAR_10_DOLLARS

$HBR The most secure cryptocurrency, developed by an Air Force computer scientist, governed by a council of giants like Google, IBM, and Dell

765cc_Triple

Last 4 minutes. Any guesses as to which tickers will have a bounce back tomorrow? Me thinks Google and 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