+0.0
net board stance
what this means
83.83
+0.5% · close 2026-09-08
-0% / -0% / +24%
1m / 3m / 12m
-24%
vs SPY since 2025-03-08
56%
of 52w range · -13.1% off high
—
hit rate as primary
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 45 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 NEE
No closed window has used this ticker as its primary play, so there is no scored record here yet. Adjacent plays are listed but never scored.
| idea | call | play | verdict | R | α | closed |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ⚡ IRA energy tax credits survive repeal because AI needs the electrons | ▲ LONG | adjacent | HIT | +63.7% | +42.3 | 2026-03-08 |
The tape — what was actually said
every capture on any idea holding NEE, newest first · quotes verbatim, timestamps deep-link into the episode
PH
Phil Deutch
oppose ×2
▲ on
⚡ IRA energy tax credits survive repeal because AI needs the electrons
E238 · 2025-08-09
▶ 58:24
And so the point of this chart is if we really need all we could eat on energy for artificial intelligence, and if artificial intelligence, the race is the, you know, race for national security and dominance in the world. This is saying we're taking a step backwards on this supply.
it's cheaper to put in a solar and battery farm than a new coal plant. It is 100%.
These methane plants are half the cost of solar. They can get stood up in less than two years to generate a gigawatt.
we are sort of back to basics almost in a sense where in the absence of power, I think AI is not going to be the thing that we think it can be. So that's going to create an enormous amount of appetite by the federal government to do deals and get players on the field. And that's to me very exciting. So, yeah, I came away really, really risk on, I guess is the best way to say it.
So, I don't know, my perspective is get rid of all the subsidies at this point, create a clean slate, but don't do anything to hinder the production of electricity, because we need literally as much of it as we can get our hands on.
Now, I will say, from my point of view, I'm not a huge fan of being dependent on government subsidized energy at all. So if the government is having to play a role in funding stuff, there's something really questionable in terms of our sustainability on that energy production source.
You take the financial incentive away and you can't underwrite this thing. What are they going to do? They're just going to stop doing it. So in the absence of electrons, what happens? Prices go up, it's inflationary, and now you'll have to allocate electrons.
Inside the IRA, I think that there were two things, and I've said this pretty repeatedly, but I just want to put it on the record again. The ITC credits and the ITC transfer markets for those credits, the tax equity markets, are critical industries in America to support private investment in all kinds of very complicated markets, energy markets being the most important.
But the other part of the IRA, this narrow part is what it did to reinforce tax incentives and tax equity, which is a $200 billion market that incentivizes that 90% of energy generation. So my point is that when you start to get into the details, when the house, ways and means community has to figure out what part to put back, this is going to be hard because it's like, hold on, if you got the whole thing, now all of a sudden you take 90% of the incremental energy generation incentives out of the market, you don't have enough electrons.