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

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.