+0.0
net board stance
what this means
124.39
+1.8% · close 2026-09-08
-3% / -4% / +28%
1m / 3m / 12m
-28%
vs SPY since 2021-10-16
59%
of 52w range · -13.5% off high
0/1
hit rate as primary · α -30
Where we stand — 0 live ideas
No active idea holds this ticker. Anything below is history.
Where the winds are blowing
NET BOARD STANCE, LAST 53 EPISODES —
rising = the besties are building this position, falling = abandoning it. Replayed from
score_events; an idea counts from birth until its window closes.
PRICE VS SPY OVER THE SAME WINDOW, % — did the
talk lead the tape or follow it?
Who's pushing which way
each voice's net push ON THIS TICKER — their most recent stance per idea × the idea's direction × strength, so supporting a bearish idea pushes down. Not conviction (that lives on the idea); this is direction of travel per person. what w= means
Track record on ARKQ
As a PRIMARY play the besties are 0 hit / 0 partial / 1 miss over 1 closed window — credit 0.0, average α -30.0. Adjacent plays are listed but never scored.
| idea | call | play | verdict | R | α | closed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🤖 Expensive labour pulls forward automation capex | ▲ LONG | adjacent | MISS | -52.6% | -33.7 | 2022-10-16 |
| 🤖 Deep physical science and R&D is the one long-duration bet still worth buying | ▲ LONG | primary | MISS | -40.0% | -30.0 | 2022-12-04 |
The tape — what was actually said
every capture on any idea holding ARKQ, newest first · quotes verbatim, timestamps deep-link into the episode
I do think the intersection of life sciences with software creates this era of opportunity.
I would build something in energy transition or in life sciences.
I think that's going to be the very interesting thing with the robots as well, is all of these decisions they're making, moving cars through roads, all of a sudden we're going to see that with VTOLs, vertical takeoff and landing, you know, aircraft, and we're going to see it with this general robot.
We are within, I think, five, 10 years of a lot of these jobs. We're talking tens of millions of manual labor jobs being gone. And we're going to look at this moment in time where we try to squeeze an extra 10 or 20 percent out of these employers. And then you're going to see these employers say, you know what? 24-hour-a-day robot. Yeah, it's a little bit upfront cost. I'll put it on the lease and they're just going to move to these robots. It's really very close to being game over for manual labor.
Well, the reason is because if you raise the minimum wage too much, then these employers have a huge incentive to replace that labor with automation. And so the unintended consequence that Chamath is talking about is that these big chain restaurants are going to rely even more heavily on automation now.
And so to think that they're not going to just invest heavily now at the corporate level, the next franchisee of McDonald's will still pay a million dollars for franchise fee but will give will be given a bevy of robots that they rent for McDonald's and they'll have to hire half or third less.
Number two, businesses are going to automate. So new businesses will emerge that actually do the fast food work or do the car building work or do the dock loading and unloading work that are automated and they'll have an inherent advantage in the economy and they'll win.
But generally speaking, technology drives productivity gains, but it's deflationary in the short term.
RY
Ryan Petersen
oppose ×2
▲ on
🤖 Expensive labour pulls forward automation capex
E66 · 2022-02-05
▶ 31:21
Flexport already made this technology. We could 10x the throughput of one of these ports overnight ... We already have this tech. So it's a matter of implementation, deployment, and how do you get around a lot of people that don't really want to see better running ports. And it's pretty sad to sit where I sit.
So the low-cost model of consumerism in the United States, which has been a stronghold for our economy for 100 years at this point, may be coming to an end, or it will accelerate the implementation of automation across that sector of the economy.
There is one kind of version of that company, though, that you can buy, in my opinion, and what I am still buying, which is deep physical science and R&D, because those businesses in some ways are still on a risk-adjusted basis, in my opinion. ... the outcome in success is so asymmetric. Those are really interesting to me businesses in moments like this where, you know, if I'm, if I'm de-levering my portfolio, that's how I'm thinking about it, which is I want to make those kind of bets in the future.
The other free market argument that could be made is that these current trends will accelerate a trend towards more automation of low cost labor ... So there's a number of these automation industries that may significantly benefit and that ends up ultimately being deflationary and the market comes into balance.