FOXA

Fox Corporation

stock all instruments
+0.0
net board stance what this means
64.82
-0.9% · close 2026-09-08
+2% / -5% / +5%
1m / 3m / 12m
+46%
vs SPY since 2024-01-26
61%
of 52w range · -14.0% off high
0/3
hit rate as primary · α -44

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 60 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

Friedberg
Friedberg w=0.84 politics-market
1 idea (0 live) · last heard E125
-1
pushes down
Jason
Jason w=1.00 politics-market
1 idea (0 live) · last heard E159
-2
pushes down
Sacks
Sacks w=0.97 politics-market
3 ideas (0 live) · last heard E189
-3
pushes down
Chamath
Chamath w=1.02 politics-market
2 ideas (0 live) · last heard E125
-6
pushes down

Track record on FOXA

As a PRIMARY play the besties are 0 hit / 1 partial / 2 miss over 3 closed windows — credit 0.17, average α -44.0. Adjacent plays are listed but never scored.

ideacallplayverdictRαclosed
🏛️ Defamation litigation wave hits media balance sheets ▼ SHORT primary PARTIAL +5.0% -16.8 2024-04-21
📈 Fox's neocon drift misaligns it with its own audience — bad for the business ▼ SHORT primary MISS -52.8% -71.3 2025-07-26
🏛️ Dominion's $1.6B defamation claim against Fox fails the actual-malice test ▲ LONG primary MISS -15.1% -43.9 2024-03-03

The tape — what was actually said

every capture on any idea holding FOXA, newest first · quotes verbatim, timestamps deep-link into the episode

Sacks Sacks support ×2 ▼ on 📈 Fox's neocon drift misaligns it with its own audience — bad for the business E189 · 2024-07-26 ▶ 44:01
So I think that Fox already has a problem where they are becoming misaligned with their audience. And regards to what you think of the politics, this is bad for business.
Sacks Sacks oppose ×1 ▼ on 🏛️ Defamation litigation wave hits media balance sheets E159 · 2023-12-29 ▶ 54:14
I do think the judgments or the magnitude of the judgments are ridiculous
Jason Jason support ×2 ▼ on 🏛️ Defamation litigation wave hits media balance sheets E159 · 2023-12-29 ▶ 53:25
And they're facing an even bigger lawsuit, a $2.7 billion lawsuit with another election technology company that will happen in 2025 Pension funds are now suing this loathsome company because they lost so much money for them.
Friedberg Friedberg support ×1 ▼ on 🏛️ Defamation litigation wave hits media balance sheets E125 · 2023-04-21 ▶ 38:29
I think there's an interesting question here on how far this goes with respected, maybe it invites the lawsuits, like you guys say, where there's things that are more on the line.
Sacks Sacks support ×2 ▼ on 🏛️ Defamation litigation wave hits media balance sheets E125 · 2023-04-21 ▶ 36:06
look, I hope Chamath is right that this actually incentivizes more actions against media companies because I think their feet need to be held to the fire and they need to do a better job publishing the truth.
Chamath Chamath support ×3 ▼ on 🏛️ Defamation litigation wave hits media balance sheets E125 · 2023-04-21 ▶ 34:54
This is going to embolden a lot of people to take matters into their own hands and sue some of these media companies if the lie is egregious enough, and it negatively impacts them enough. I think it would embolden a lot of folks.
Chamath Chamath oppose ×3 ▲ on 🏛️ Dominion's $1.6B defamation claim against Fox fails the actual-malice test E125 · 2023-04-21 ▶ 32:48
Fox, I think, has only 4 billion of cash, so they just spent 20 some odd percent of it paying this off. And if I were a shareholder, the question I would ask is did we actually make enough money to justify having to pay almost $800 million of our cash balance? The answer is probably no. And this is the first of a bunch of lawsuits that they have.
Sacks Sacks reversal ×2 ▲ on 🏛️ Dominion's $1.6B defamation claim against Fox fails the actual-malice test E125 · 2023-04-21 ▶ 29:32
So for this one network to get a fine of like 800 million, it's like pretty incredible. I mean, they should be handing out a lot more of these in my view, not just to Fox. But yeah, look, I would like to see, to that end, I would like to see the standard in New York Times versus Sullivan revised by the Supreme Court.
Sacks Sacks support ×2 ▲ on 🏛️ Dominion's $1.6B defamation claim against Fox fails the actual-malice test E118 · 2023-03-03 ▶ 1:17:13
But I don't think they're going to be because that's not the legal standard. I believe that if a television network knowingly spreads and endorses baseless accusations against somebody, which they know or should know is basically untrue, I think they should absolutely be liable for libel or defamation. But that is not what the law requires.