VC

LarryTalbot

1. QCOM transition plan to scale from mobile to automotive, IoT and AI /LLM products going well. Strong B/S and dividend. 2. BCSF for dividend yield, reasonable and discounted NAV and first lien portfolio focus. Also, Bain affiliation and track record. 3. GOOGL for its rapid integration of AI / LLM to services; Cloud; YouTube; Other bets (Waymo and 3 for 1 VC funds: (DeepMind, X, GV); strong B/S. 4. CGBD for dividend yield, lower leverage and discounted NAV, strong B/S, recent price decline. 5. FDUS for dividend yield, high quality first lien focus, 60% focus on IT, business services, and component manufacturing portfolio. Moved out of equity investing the past 6 months due to geopolitical uncertainties and tariff concerns. Also, without a stable US administration the wild card factor is too significant to ignore, and that influences my investment decisions.

HarvardOnTheRaritan

Sure, just like Trump’s first term, right? Collectively there’s more money than ever and fewer places to park it. What else is going to happen without a multi-generational shift in the economic model globally? If you’re in PE/VC-heavy industries you’ve seen deal-making cash dry up a bit with interest rate changes, real estate is always an alternative vehicle for investment, but the top 2 tax brackets in the US are just investing more than ever before and showing no signs of slowing.

moorhound

Data Bricks seems to be ahead of the game when it comes to making business-use agentic AI instead of just LLM offshoots. That's where the real AI boom money is going. With all those AI data centers going up in Ohio, this is gonna be a big one (if they don't just stay private and keep the gains for the VC rich).

Red_Zone_Broly

#I'm convinced the UK doesn't want it's inhabitants to have any money. -FCA makes it tough to trade BTC -Taxes are extortionate to the point that startup & VC culture is practically non-existent -UK stocks themselves are dinosaur companies that people only buy for average dividends -The entire FTSE 100 itself is smaller than a single MAG7 big tech stock -People there are just generally afraid of taking risks

Fun-Personality-8008

The main difference is there are actually revenues driving stock prices, and the IPO market has slowed to a crawl. This is partly due to SPACs but we all know those are scammy so easy to avoid. But mostly due to the fact that most companies worth IPOing have been private for ten years or more already with VC funding.

Venice_LA

Private Equity and VC funds in PE. YES PLS APO KKR

UnscrupulousObserver

OpenAI hates that Robinhood is issuing tokenized shares because it marks their valuation to market, which eliminates much room for financial maneuvers, compensation negotiations, and can disrupt their operations. If this move by Robinhood stays successful and legal, then they will eat the lunch of private equity or even VC firms.

volckerwasright

Kramer, you’re going to sell shares of your OpenAI shares? Is that legal? They’re called tokens, Jerry, and its the future of investing. We are democratizing the VC unicorns and giving Joe Sixpack a taste

Chazzyboi69

Potentially a cool thing if it does get regulated properly. Gives regular investors access to opportunities typically only available to VC's. There will without a doubt be some scams and insane valuations in the early days but as it matures could be a very good thing for investors.

Confident-Court2171

VC terms - preferred participating shares with anti dilution mechanisms. What you get - A share, based on a valuation of 72 Trillion USD. But it’s CRYPTO! How fucking cool is THAT? It’s going on the same USB drive I store my Sad Ape.

bufonia1

i can VC fund

Rude_Judgment7928

Start-ups are fucking VC/PE grift (I'm a VC LP, I know the game). It's just the oligopolies spare cash floating between friends to try to win the lotto. The expenses for hiring an employee at your mom-and-pop corner store to help with sales is **already** 100% "tax deductible". VCs are just mad they can't extract more taxpayer dollars to play at the casino with.

Soger91

Don't wait too long, once the original VC fund cashes out sell pressure disappears!

moorhound

Invest in what? All the actual AI companies were either FAANG, required being VC, or are smoke-and-mirror bullshit like BBAI (its at half its IPO price)

DrHarrisonLawrence

Yeah so about that…specifically Mexico… Fact check this please but I was told that if you’re a foreigner and you buy a plot of land, it cannot stay in your family as a generational asset. Something like 100 years of ownership is allowed and then the Mexican government is allowed to seize it or some shit. Source: friend’s wealthy VC dad wanted to buy a $15m property. Considered Mexico because he could have a palace on a hundred acres or something. Completely abandoned that idea based on the information above. So he bought in Florida instead because he wants to leave that $15m property to his great grandchildren when it’s worth like $50m+ in 100 years

lilanut_21

What you’re suggesting is to run your own portfolio like a VC. They invest in a portfolio of companies knowing full well the vast majority will go to zero, a handful will have modest outcomes, and few will 10x (or even more). Should also note that VC is probably furthest out on the risk curve, hence the need to generate massive returns with this model. These funds have a 10 year horizon as well. So, either way, whatever moves you make, you need to hold.

gamezoomnets

The trades are done by her financial advisor and husband, who’s literally a VC and has been before she was a politician. He was worth more than a $30mm+ by the 2000s according to her financial disclosures. That’s also why most of her trades are tech focused. Here is an [article](https://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/Pelosi-s-husband-prefers-a-low-profile-2660253.php) from 2007, when she became speaker of the house about Paul’s career, “Ken Boehm, head of the conservative National Legal and Policy Center in Virginia, spent months last year looking into Nancy Pelosi's financial records, campaign contributions and legislative records, looking for any hint of impropriety. There was no sign that she enriched herself personally by her official actions," he told The Chronicle last year. "She didn't cross the line as far as I could tell." Look, I’m all for forcing congressmen and women to only hold broadly diverse indexes, require pre-clearance of trades, and have blackout periods when congress is in session. But, public service shouldn’t be a vow of poverty. We need to compensate our elected officials and other government workers (especially at the federal level) way more if we want a more effective and efficient government. I want to be governed by the best.

moorhound

Man, all the cool-ass new tech companies - xMEMS, SiFly, UniTree - are private and can't be traded unless you super fuckin' VC rich. IPO these bitches already, whether or not you have a product or make a profit doesn't matter anymore lol

chopsui101

think the market is different today than it was back then. Even if it pops would any but the VC's even notice?

AffectionateLove2

It’s what VC firms are investing in today

TheMaskedGorditto

As someone who works in biotech and likes picking stocks… I will never buy biotech stocks. Even if your right about them succeeding, the market has no idea how to valuate them. Time and time again a stock will boom on good test results, the market will price in too much future success without realizing how much more it takes to grow a biotech company then a software company. The market doesnt have nuanced knowledge of medicine and bio and just hears “tech” and “saves lives” and prices it like a high growth software company. I work in this space and the people making the real money in biotech startups are early private equity/VC who sell asap post-ipo

chespirito2

Why don't they just build this. There is nothing special about this startups technology, there's a VC who built his own version just for shits and giggles. Honestly what are they buying, the famous "Perplexity" name?

spicedpanda

I mean, PE is not set up for high risk—that’s what the VC sector is for

Glotto_Gold

Well, the major advantages consultants have are access to the strategies other companies have used, smart & conscientious people, and the political advantages of not being part of the company (& thereby not having any stake). How can a Harvard MBA actually give advice on "being brave"? Being a Harvard MBA working for an established company is uniquely "not brave". Arguably there could be a role for "ex-entrepreneurs turned consultant", but honestly that's closer to the VC model, and these individuals probably don't have useful experiences for Warner Brothers to take advantage of.

MikeHoncho1323

Tons of VC/PE/hedge funds beat it yearly, let alone the hundreds of thousands of profitable private traders. Just because you can’t doesn’t mean I can’t. I still invest heavily in the S&P, but by day trading/swing trading strong stocks and using leverage you can really pump up your profits as long as you aren’t dumb or greedy

SirGus-

Anyone who runs, is a VC. Anyone who stands still, is a well-disciplined VC!

Tim_Apple_938

Tesla bag holder spotted You do realize LiDAR gets cheaper every year. And jaguars are not required. Waymo will be as cheap as a model3 in 2-3 years obviously More importantly tho. Uber won market share not by a workable business model, but by subsidizing loss leading w VC bucks. Pretty easy to loss lead when you are Alphabet w $100B in cash and making more net revenue than any company on earth.

No-Big-9170

AI is going to tank when the VC money dries up and cultural sentiment becomes even more negative, and then skyrocket when it starts curing cancer and replacing 30-50% of the workforce

frank_690

Government policy influence for another VC backed green dildo When the VC backers see this con going south -- big rug pull going to be a real bagger

SandwichAmbitious286

Honestly that just sounds like normal business in the US. That's what all of our businesses do. Low-ball entry (usually using VC funding) to establish a seat in the market, then push up price once you have a certain amount of market capture. It's a tactic straight from the business playbook. Part of the value of what they are doing is *we* don't need to have the manufacturing/refining in our backyard, which keeps our backyard a lot cleaner.

smutmybutt

I would say that example just proves that the Baltimore PD is fucking stupid. Any ineffective system can recommend people to arrest. I think Musk and Thiel are capable people who have compromised their own capability by falling so deeply into their ideology, self-absorbed echo chamber, and worst instincts (although Elon has the most publicly available evidence to back up this claim). In the case of Elon he has a long-term addiction to drugs that are negatively impacting his brain. There was also evidence of Elon being a bad manager in his “golden years.” His main talent was being a bully with VC money. By most accounts he was basically kicked out of PayPal. If Elon was smart he wouldn’t have needed to support the anti-EV party in order to avoid SEC trouble. If he was smart he wouldn’t have alienated his main customer base for Tesla, running the only EV brand with declining sales. If he was smart his multi-year head start producing cars in China would lead to his vehicles beating out BYD and other Chinese competition (companies run by smart people like Apple have no problem maintaining their first mover advantage in China).

reaper527

> and it takes a long time to develop a platform like this so I don’t see much competition not necessarily, it takes a lot of know-how and money. digg for example actually has a shot given that it's 1. got name recognition already before the relaunch (both for the company itself AND the people running it) 2. has people running it with experience in large scale social media sites (so they won't have to figure out server load management on the fly. old digg literally is what caused a lot of the server load mitigation techniques to be created to begin with as the massive traffic spikes were called "the digg effect" at the time) 3. the name recognition SHOULD make it relatively easy for them to get the VC money needed to build something functional.

greytoc

I updated my comment but I want to also add: Remember - the general statistic is that about 75% of venture backed startups will fail. And venture-backed means that these startups have already secured funding from professional VC's. It sounds like you are talking about a pre-seed or pre-series A startup. So you need to take those risks into consideration.

Fun-Organization721

I will buy any business that Joe Lonsdale or Alex Karp take public. They are both brilliant and get the future like no others (except maybe their buddies and co-investors Elon Musk and Peter Thiel). Lucky Palmer is also in this group (Anduril). 8VC is Lonsdale's investment vehicle. I would like to buy other of those companies when they become public, but will probably never get a shot at a PLTR again (bought when market cap was only about $10B and it is now over $300B, a 30 bagger so far; looking for a 200 bagger)

MickeyKae

I've seen this come up a few times. "If you like cash, why not just hold cash?" "If you like Bitcoin, why not just hold Bitcoin?" Takes like this don't stand up to scrutiny because they miss the forest for the trees. At minimum, a bet on GameStop is a bet on Ryan Cohen's ability as the head of the company (and as an industry insider) to raise money and then turn that money into a lucrative enterprise. Here's an excerpt from the Harvard Business Review article about Cohen and how he approached raising money for Chewy: >I had launched Chewy two years earlier with Michael Day, using our own cash and small loans, but my vision was to build a large business, and I knew that significant capital would be required to finance the growth. We approached dozens of VC firms—I even flew out to Silicon Valley from our South Florida headquarters and went door-to-door on Sand Hill Road explaining how Chewy would succeed by delighting customers and running an ultra-efficient operation. But everyone turned us down. It appears he is following a similar tact since taking the helm in 2023. Whatever ultimate vision for GameStop he has in mind, it's going to be expensive - so it stands to reason that hoarding cash through offerings (and now note sales to private investors) is how he is planning to get that going. Really not that different from courting VC firms. Except now everyone is saying yes when he comes knocking to raise money, especially based on the results of the last note sale. Time will tell if this all culminates in something shiny for investors, but calling it an ETF is pretty limp in the face of all that context.

XiaoDianGou

Have you done any cash flow calculations, bringing that to present value AT THE DISCOUNT RATE OF A VENTURE CAPITAL FIRM (because what you are doing with your money is penny-VC)?

ArchegosCapitalCEO

I don’t trust a VC investor that can’t figure out wi-fi

TheYoungCEO

1. Cardano is the 3rd largest smart contract blockchain by market cap. 2. Unlike many chains that rely on VC funding and insider allocations, Cardano’s ICO was open, accessible, and designed to minimize centralized influence from the start. 3. Cardano boasts ~1.5 billion USD in its treasury—funds that are controlled by the communtiy 100% through onchain drepps and governance. Think US congress but for blockchains. 4. Built with a fixed supply and Bitcoin-like tokenomics, ADA cannot be inflated or changed at the whim of a group of developers in a Discord chat. 5. Cardano’s extended UTXO (EUTXO) model has several advantages over the traditional account-based systems: it allows deterministic fees, multiple operations in a single transaction, and easy interoperability with chains like Bitcoin and Ergo. Dont believe me look for yourself - https://eutxo.org/ 6. Cardano operates on a research-first development philosophy. While some criticize its deliberate pace, this approach attracts institutions and developers who value reliability and uptime—Cardano has had zero downtime since launch. 7. Cardano has consistently ranked among the most decentralized blockchains using virtually every major metric—and according to the Edinburgh Decentralization Index, it's the most decentralized chain in existence. 8. Liquid, non-custodial staking on Cardano means users retain full control of their assets at all times. In countries like Switzerland, this design exempts ADA staking from regulatory scrutiny. Because ADA isn’t locked, it’s often excluded from "TVL" metrics—something the Cardano community frequently debates the relevance of. 9. Cardano is home to the largest on-chain governance program in the entire crypto ecosystem. For anyone who values decentralization, this is arguably the most important achievement in our industry next to Bitcoin’s proof-of-work consensus. 10. For years, critics labeled Cardano a “ghost chain”—yet it continues to deliver on its roadmap, shows among the highest GitHub activity, is growing its ecosystem, and remains one of the few chains with zero outages.

1-Dollar-Doge-Coins

They will just continue to parrot all the cash and lack of debt GME has, along with owning Bitcoin, as if that is somehow bullish for the company’s future prospects. And then when you tell them how none of those those things are bullish for growing their core operations, they’ll tell you GME should be viewed more like a VC fund or SPAC.

20Lush

they dont chase VC bait trends, their valuation is possibly the most "fair" with respect to the fundamentals out of the mag7

Small_Razzmatazz7779

Honestly, I'd rather see this than a flashy launch with a bunch of VC hype or some old company with terrible customer support. I've used the platform before - sure its new, but the customer support is amazing and at the end of the day they are backed by IBKR so it just feels safer to me. What do you think?

DepthValley

I mostly agree with you, though do think there'd be a lot of induced demand (if it theoretically worked). I don't take many Ubers in NYC but if the price went down in half I probably would. I used to take ubers when they were burning VC money and were that cheap.

NeedleworkerNo4900

This is a bad take. Apple is a hardware company. Why would they bet billions on something that we still don’t know the capacity of. It’s not like they’re openai and pumped full of VC cash. AI is a risk of their own money in an unproven field and outside of their business model. Apple is doing the right thing financially.

RelevantTruck7803

Tbh I'm not sure. They both started their Discords around the time I started trading options (not very well then lol) so I got in both @ the beginning n am "grandfathered in" to their original price. I think TMI has a lower tier for ppl more interested in just swings that probably doesn't include the live VC. Still has trade ideas, watch lists, etc daily n updates on what hes in and when he'd be looking to cut.

73Shellder

No. Graham had some good lines in The Intelligent Investor about what IPO stands for - the one that jumps to mind is Insiders Profit Only. Basically, there's a good chance you're just providing exit liquidity for some VC.

MarcatBeach

AI is nowhere near the dot com era. I worked in tech and did technology due diligence for one of the major VC players during that era. When VC's are throwing hundreds of millions at a slick powerpoint presentation, then AI has hit that level. every pitch was... it will be the ebay of ( insert industry here ). That was almost every pitch. the whole point of the dot com was to keep getting investment.

Current-Spring9073

I've used it and it's definitely not incredible. It's pretty med tbh but gets better when you figure out how to prompt it correctly. What industries is it disrupting? I know people who do use it in their fields of VC and from the sounds of it, they're just dumbing down the processes that were already working just fine. Nobody is more productive they just work differently. Also massive layoffs are currently happening and will continue to happen with no end in sight. AI isn't disrupting anything though, it's the policies out brilliant politicians are pushing that are disrupting things currently.

FxHorizonTrading

Ok so.. you know the rule of thumb probably - hold roughly 6 months of net expenses as emergency fund you can dip into fast and reliable - put that in a money market fund so it keeps up with inflation (more or less, roughly) If you retire in 4y, many will tell you to de-risk and getting into bonds.. in fact, now is probably not a bad time to get some bonds, especially if your 100% between VOO and GLD - a bond ladder would make a lot of sense honestly - also assuming your in the US and thus hold a ton in 401ks and IRAs.. Anyway.. high risk profile for max returns - lots of options.. tech funds like QQQ, single stocks like nvda, amzn, meta - you name it - crypto comes to mind (I dont like it personally beside a mini allocation of 2.5-5% in btc for long long longterm hodl), PE and VC you gotta look if thats not too little (some specialized funds allow such small allocations too) or high leverage RE.. going exotic you could even explore art, cars or stuff like pokemon cards if you really say you wanna risk it all for a potentially big buck.. My personal recomendation for a serious buck without risking it all in a single line, would be specialized PE / VC funds or trading firms.. gotta admit, Im having a personal bias on this..

The_Prophet_of_Doom

Worked for a small engineering company making aircraft drives, we were approached for acquisition by the air taxi company that Uber either owned or partnered with back in 2021. Smelled like complete bullshit, only existed to accrue VC funding and then IPO as a pump and dump in our opinion.

citationmustang

This business is and always has been a scam. They've been using this concept since the early 2010s to try to pull in grant and VC money and haven't done a thing. Launching a big hobby rocket is just a show to try to pull in hapless penny stock investors to soak for more money.

Twisted9Demented

Accounting internship at a VC , a certification that bankers take I think its called series 7

ChelseaChicken

Small caps have changed over the last 20 years. Companies are staying private longer because they don’t need access to capital markets to fund their growth any longer. Now they can stay private and get their capital from Private Equity and VC funds. Don’t have to deal with regulators and the capital is much more patient. Now they come public when they are already a large cap company and go right into the Russell 1000 index and/or S&P 500 Russell 2000 index (small caps) is now made up of low growth companies and fallen angels that are going the wrong way. Move some of the small cap money into mid cap and large cap. You’ll do better in the long run.

spyVSspy420-69

Congratulations, your brain now qualifies for $1,000,000,000 in VC funding.

StockNirvana

Yes. There are two Government of Canada programs covering 25% and 10%, and the provincial government of Nova Scotia is covering 25%. The company still needs to raise the 40% to unlock those funds, and there are several options they have from the federal BDC (Business Development Bank of Canada), CSA (Canadian Space Agency), CIF (Canadian Infrastructure Fund), various space venture capital funds like Seraphim Space Trust $SSIT.LSE or some combination of those. It won't be an equity raise. The company still needs general operational expenses funded but the three VC funds that did the seed round seem to be taking care of that.

Piyush4758

The quantum computing hype definitely reminds many of the early EV boom, where valuations raced ahead of real-world adoption. But unlike meme-fueled trades, quantum computing does have real scientific traction. That said, here's a more grounded view: Current Reality is that Most quantum computing systems today (e.g., IBM, Rigetti, IonQ) are in the Noisy Intermediate-Scale Quantum (NISQ) era — useful mostly for experimentation, not for outperforming classical systems on real-world tasks. I think Short term (2025–2028): Incremental progress. Better error correction, more stable qubits, and early enterprise use cases like quantum simulation for pharma/chemicals (BASF, Roche, etc.). Longer term (2028–2035): If breakthroughs occur in error correction and scaling (e.g., 1M+ physical qubits), some real competitive advantage may emerge in cryptography, portfolio optimization, or logistics. For eg Companies like - IBM aims to release a 100,000-qubit machine by 2033, but that still doesn’t guarantee commercial supremacy. Volkswagen used a D-Wave quantum computer to optimize Beijing traffic, reducing congestion by 10%—but this was a highly targeted use case, not a general breakthrough Investor Perspective: Public companies like IonQ and Rigetti saw major price swings — IonQ surged post-SPAC, then corrected heavily. Most are still pre-revenue or revenue-light. IonQ Revenue (2023): ~$22 million Net Loss: >$100 million Valuations are still based on future optionality, not current performance. VC Interest Remains Strong: In 2023, $800M+ was invested in quantum startups globally (source: PitchBook), but it's still experimental tech with a long runway.

stewie3128

I think it would be more accurate to say that these are VC- stage companies that went retail-public too early. On the "fraud" question, I'd say that most quantum companies are hype-driven science projects as opposed to criminal enterprises. $QUBT opportunistically pivoted to quantum branding, but that's not "fraud." Certainly limit your long exposure to these companies since the tech is decades away from maturity, but much of this post is overstated. Unlike Nikola or Theranos, these companies don't appear to be falsifying demos or manipulating medical data.

FossilFrothy

The company I work for develops software for venture capitalists and private equity firms. I occasionally attend meetings with our VC and PE customers. It's horribly disillusioning to hear these people talk about their day-to-day workflows. Far too many decisions they make about where to invest millions of dollars is based on FOMO, gut feelings, whatever the current buzzword is (blockchain, nfts, crypto, ai, etc...) and other superficial factors like the educational background of the founders.

jhonkas

sergrey brin is buying, he is the other cofounder of google he has a VC/FO that manges over 100bn, assuming they are just accuulating on the lows of googl/goog as he "knows" google, since he is the founder

jhonkas

arrh sergy is buying, maybe he ujst packing up the VC and just sticking to what he knows [https://www.nasdaq.com/market-activity/stocks/googl/insider-activity](https://www.nasdaq.com/market-activity/stocks/googl/insider-activity)

ungerecht

🥭: Without bone spurs I would have killed all VC

Jkayakj

I'd disagree with this. Bogleheads is a great method for stock investing, but PE and VC definitely have their place and make bank. Some of the high minimum asset banks (talking 15-20m to invest) VC and PE have made ~15% a year or more after fees for the past few decades. Not saying OP can do this now or even ever, but not all are there to scam you.

RealMcGonzo

Some gets destroyed. Money spent naming a stadium, all those crypto parties, conferences and million dollar dinners with the President, celeb endorsements, influencers. If crypto is still around during the next presidential election, I wonder if they'll spend half a billion on the election just from crypto bros. But it's not just crypto, everything is crazy. That SoftBank guy giving SBF how many billions? Venture Capital is now a household phrase and a TV series that's been a hit for over a decade? And holy cow when people walk into that show with those ludicrous valuations from rounds of VC funding - people will throw fucking massive piles of money at anything.

FxHorizonTrading

Should you look to hire a wealth advisor? Yes, BUT! Be sure they actually provide solid advice, something worth listening to / looking at Real estate - many risk(s) and not passive, upside can be limited in many cases and thus not worth it comparing it to the avg market return - estate funds mitigate quite a bit of the risks + more liquid PE funds, VC etc - yes, good chances, high risk as well tho - be sure to check the track record - also understand its usually very illiquid Other options exist too, passive investing like bogleheads is never a bad choice, though What to skip - actively managed funds, where you just pay a high fee for no alpha or risk mitigation Good luck and.. congratz!

Jealous_Response_492

Just gutting the plane to get it up to required specs is absurd enough, especially when two replacements for the role of air-force one has already been funded to the tune of 4.4bn USD. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing\_VC-25#VC-25B](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_VC-25#VC-25B)

ClassIINav

Keep it simple and go over to r/Bogleheads . Private equity, VC and fancy wealth managers are just there to scam you out of returns without you even realizing they're doing it. Low cost index funds are all you need.

Vtrader_io

If you're okay with illiquidity and have a longer time horizon, VC or buyout funds offer high upside. You'll need to vet GPs or consider funds of funds for access. For private equity deals, lookup the term "silver tsunami". Many elder-owned businesses are looking for new owners, creating a potential market for those seeking to acquire existing, established businesses. There is over $10 trillion worth of small businesses that will be up for sale in the next 10 years.

Vtrader_io

If you're okay with illiquidity and have a longer time horizon, VC or buyout funds offer high upside. You'll need to vet GPs or consider funds of funds for access. For private equity deals, lookup the term "silver tsunami". Many elder owned businesses are looking for new owners, creating a potential market for those seeking to acquire existing, established businesses. There is over $10 trillion worth of small businesses that will be up for sale in the next 10 years.

Uniklady

So much to say here. First, major ‘Gambler’s mentality’ here and I make no apologies for it. Gambling can be the stock markets, real estate, selling or buying insurance policies, casinos and more. So many things fall under that designation. It is not bad to be a gambler, it just means you may be more aggressive vs conservative in your choices and take more risks. It is very true that you can’t win if you’re not in the game and bigger risks bring bigger rewards and losses. I have been trading stocks and options for over 35 years. I have made 250k in a month and also lost $250k in a month before. These past 3-5 months I lost 100k but instead of selling, I dollar cost averaged and bought more and have almost got it all back now in my options so I know the feeling of greed and not getting out before a great trade turns failed, many times and I will again. I have also lost out by selling too quickly only to have the stock go on a run after I sold it. But I made money and that was the point, I walked away with profit and the chance to trade another day. You have to make hard decisions and remove ANY emotion from the equation. In the end, it’s only about if your wins outdo your losses. If you win 40% of the time but those wins equal more than your 60% of losses, that’s fine. It gets easier the longer you do it. It’s like anything else you do over and over and get better at if you work hard at it. Being a Gambler doesn’t make you a bad person nor does it automatically make you an addicted person. I used to be in Advertising and loved what I did and always looked forward to Mondays to getting back to my work. I was truly addicted to my work in a good way as the more I did the better I got and was a top 1% of a Fortune 500 company for over a decade. But I am still in the trading and investment game and making my retirement from it. I’m up till 1:30AM waiting for overnight markets to open to have an idea of tomorrows opening as well as getting up at 6am to plan anything I may need before market opens (on west coast). Sunday nights I can’t wait for the market to open Monday like it’s Christmas Day every week! Like you, I am obsessed with the market and all I learn from it. But that is the key. If you’re not learning about companies and how to make certain trades and what can happen on both sides of a trade, then you shouldn’t be trading. The stock market is not a slot machine. With a slot machine you have zero control, it’s all random. With the stock market, if you focus on real companies making real profits and dividends then you have a chance to have some of your money grow for your future. If you are just trading every day based on the news for the day or selling naked puts and calls and hoping and wishing…. You have zero control over what will happen and you will lose everything. Think of where the country is going such as AI, Quantum Computing and Data Centers …. where are hedge funds and VC’s putting their money? Then look up those companies and DO YOUR RESEARCH. Major companies like Netflix, Tesla, Meta, Microsoft, Nividia, Palantir, Dominoes Pizza, Spotify, Shopify, Cava are just a few …. Think about the shoes you buy, the places you eat or shop, the subscriptions you have … are they good companies? Will they be affected by price hikes from tariffs? We don’t know if there will be any tariffs in the end because it’s a negotiation game and the pieces are always moving, so don’t bet on it cause you have no control over the moves. Don’t bet for weeklies or daily trades cause you have no time for turnaround if things don’t go your way. As a gambler, NEVER do margin, only trade with the money you own. Do your research…. I can’t stress that enough - knowledge is power and the money will come if you are patient. The stock market is not a get rich scheme. If it does work that way for someone on a trade (meme stocks) trust me, they will lose it all within a week. Check out the past charts of AMC and Game Stop, flew up fast and back down faster! Don’t follow or trade something that is flying, find companies with long paths behind them. Op, you sound like a really cool guy that has done what many others before you have done. As some have said, it’s only money and you have time to make it back and more. We all do the - “I could have, would have, should haves” for buying other things and trips not taken. You gain nothing from swimming in guilt. Get up and figure out how to make that money going forward, you are a smart guy. Don’t waste time on regrets, put them behind and focus forward. Best advice from someone in the game a long time is to pick up your big boy pants and give yourself some money, not a lot, but enough to learn to trade small and build up your account. If you’re going to do options, buy them for good companies with good earnings and instead of buying a lot, buy one close to ITM now but doesn’t expire for a year or two to give it time to grow. Set alert’s for when it goes down 15, 20% and then decide either to get out or if it’s a normal downturn but a good company, then hang on. You can always paper trade as well to fine tune your skills. But in the end, even all the analysts you see on TV make trading mistakes and the good ones admit it. Sit down and write on paper what you want. Do you want to grow a stock to 100k? Then find companies with strong earnings and long time dividend increases each year and let it sit. If you want to try options again, volatility makes them mover farther and faster but only buy one, ITM but longer expiration and watch it every day. The beauty I have learned about selling with modest gain vs a huge gain is that it will allow me to have my original basis back and then some extra money to buy again another day. If I lose it all from being greedy, which I still am sometimes, I won’t be able to buy again. A good way I do it is if an option skyrockets, I roll it a few months down the road, (always after their next earnings date to be able to catch any gain up to the earnings day) watching out for dividend dates, quarterly rebalancing triple witching Fridays … and then there’s real life stuff as well. If I can take a profit equal to my original basis then I have 100% gain and my original money back while also staying in the game with the future option I just rolled into if the market continues to go up. If it goes down, I’ve already profited and got my original basis back so if I lose on the roll, it’s not life threatening to me. Anyway, I’m exhausted and I love to read what I write to others because I have to live by it as well and still learn from it and sometimes I still fall down, but I make sure I always get back up. Now get back up and go for it!

30PercentIRR

SVB mainly got in trouble because a big name VC capitalised on a comparatively minor issue by leveraging it to create a bank run to try and provide an advantage to the start-ups he was invested in. The underlying issues weren't as serious all things considered as the loss of trust (which he created).

creemeeseason

He's got a great point. So many small trades companies are run basically by the tradesperson. Not much business training involved. However, it'll be interesting if we end up seeing a backlash if service quality suffers. A similar thought brings up THRY. They do a small business, mostly trades, management software. One of their big growth drivers is elder tradespeople retiring and their younger successor implementing software to help the business. Might be a little VC competition. Honestly, I hope we don't see the end of small business. The longer I interact with larger business, I really like my local guys. One of the big milestones of homeownership is when you have a comfortable amount of contractors you can call if problems come up.

NewPresWhoDis

Their VC benefactors got rich off shareholders

LowCalligrapher2455

Many Ivy League graduates started private equity, hedge funds and VC’s back in the day and they had a bias of hiring employees from those same schools so it became a self-fulfilling process. The private equity firm I worked at had the same bias but by the time I retired, they were promoting the very best junior staff to MD levels without the need for an Ivy League MBA.

AwesomeElephant8

For what it’s worth, I do agree about most of the very aggressive VC ventures like Snapchat. They, too, are irresponsibly financed and I do not expect such behavior from my government

xashyy

Exactly. And who is funding ad buyers? It’s absolutely not just consumers. Plenty of VC money to go around to fund Google ads.

Pleasant-Shallot-707

The Silicon Valley banking crisis was caused by that bank being exclusively invested in SV’s VC scene and the VC money drying up.

kalakesri

Gen z retards don't make a vlog about how you used VC money for a million dollar Europe "work" trip don't ruin it for everyone 

chopsui101

why you need an IRR model to predict for that....just assume you will lose money on these feel good green projects that don't actually produce revenue and move on to a profitable trade.....unless you are a VC and getting in at a discount on a early round funding.

stickman07738

I personally support [Brad Gerstner's Invest America](https://www.investamerica.org/?utm_campaign=ads_inves-1591797_google_t1591797-3204&utm_medium=ads_search&utm_source=google&utm_content=text&ex_tid=ads_inves-1591797_google_t1591797-3204&gad_source=1&gad_campaignid=22085512460&gbraid=0AAAAA9eIeoy5T632YK5VC0wFoy33EDGEg&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIvqTMkN-ijQMVe0T_AR3U6wy5EAAYASAAEgLrvPD_BwE) plan to only be used for retirement purposes.

johndsmits

But your water bill is higher. More flushing. Zero sum game for the poors. Profit for the wealthy. I'm still wondering what the Saudis will do with all that primo tech, planes and AI services aside from parking money like they do in real estate and VC funds.

Agent_Boomhauer

Her real portfolio is managed by her VC husband, but all the kitchen table and pillow talk is exclusively above board.

anotheronetouse

Her husband brought a ton of money into their marriage and owns a fucking VC firm. _She_ didn't make all that money. I agree with everything else, but I'm tired of people ignoring the fact that there are other sources for their wealth.

HireEddieJordan

>"when that money would’ve been better spent on actual business growth." We don't do that anymore; 1. Secure VC cash 2. Operate at huge loss 3. Sink competition 4. Be monopoly 5. Figure out how to turn a profit?* 6. Buy any company who secures VC cash Are you a Big 5 company now? If no, repeat step 6 until bought out by one. *Failed to figure out step 5 "how to turn a profit?" Ignore it until it's someone else's problem.

fomoandyoloandnogrow

[The sound of bears getting hunted by a flying monster that shoots lightning and does wild Haymaker Truth social deal swings in the market](https://youtu.be/_rcGNV4VC7M?si=rO_t0BAVxuhuKSA2)

Djent_Reznor1

I mean it was a friends and family seed round which just means they were able to con their rich friends/family members into investing. Any VC stupid enough to even so much as sniff the Series A of a speculative biotech with a direct backchannel to Holmes deserves to lose their investment.

WhatEvenIsTikTok

If he can raise millions when his phone number shows up on caller ID as SCAM LIKELY, maybe I'm the stupid one for *not* standing in front of the VC money hose. Seemed to work out well for Adam Neumann...

chopsui101

VC don't care how good or bad an idea is.....they care whether they can push the valuation up from whatever funding round they get in at to when they set their exit point.....

Embarrassed-Mango36

Biotech is so f’d already. VC funding is drying up at lightning speed. Companies are receding 400 resumes for one EA posting. I’m about to ditch 12 years in the industry to find any other job in any other market. Any port in a storm.

Wholesomebob

Silicon valley VC bros: I trust you my dude! How much would you like this time?

maximuminimum

Nope, nothing, nada… you can pay yourself a small salary negotiated by the VC. The money gets “released” in tranches decided by the VC based on your/company performance… and the money is runway, not for you to buy lambos and mansions… And at $20 mm for an early stage startup, you’re also handing out board seats, i.e., power for them to rawdog fire you if you don’t perform

FawningDeer37

Real talk: You’re running a startup. You get $20 million in VC as CEO. How much of that is going straight to you?

HybridVigor

~90% of drugs fail phase III trials. I'm sure plenty of small and medium size biotechs will easily get the VC money they need to develop drugs at those odds if they can sell the very few successful ones at tiny margins after ten years in development, right?

GlokzDNB

AI told me to keep it under 1% as VC position. Currently at 2% but not sure if I should keep it that way or increase

Reasonable_Gap_38

That’s NY bud, out here we have the dumber VC money.

Jonelololol

Got called antiquated by a VC when I asked if value investing was a part of reality anymore.

BigBoysenberry7987

I dunno… Maybe…? What’s VC? Who are you? 😂

porkypandas

I wonder what the copyright laws are. Cause Versant Ventures is a pretty significantly sized VC firm. I would've thiught that might be a little too close, but I dont know enough about the law

Holiday-West9601

Pretty sure they still haven’t made a profit! Typical VC, silicone valley shit. Keep pumping it with money, despite zero profits, then sell it to even dumber VC monies and walk away a billionaire like you did something great.

niall_9

Gemini is at the top in terms of many metrics. And who better to stay at the forefront? A hugely profitable company that can integrate AI across their offerings or a pre profit LLM company that needs VC / private equity $ to continue

oondae

Also, if you are wondering why the price is slumping so hard while btc is near ATH….. it’s because the “ruling class” (ETH foundation, founders, devs, vitalik, joe lubin, consensus, etc) are DUMPING on YOU! It’s the same with 99.99% of these scams. The only reason these cryptos exist is only there to sell to gullible retail “investors” and enrich VC and founders AT YOUR EXPENSE!

greenpride32

Do you understand what is the meaning of "risk"? I agree it is not there yet. But you have every tech giant in the world and countless startups working on AI. That group includes Google themselves. Not to mention Silicon Valley VC has poured money into AI for the past decade . Are you betting against all those groups? If the the answer is no, how sure are you that Google is going to come out on top when the dust settles? It's a risk.