+0.0
net board stance
what this means
116.1
+0.8% · close 2026-11-06
-19% / -21% / -52%
1m / 3m / 12m
-72%
vs SPY since 2025-08-01
1%
of 52w range · -52.9% off high
0/1
hit rate as primary · vs SPY -29
Where All-In Alpha stands — 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. From the
conviction ledger; an idea counts from birth until its window closes. Dots mark episodes
where this ticker's ideas were actually mentioned; a dashed stretch is silence.
Last mention E213 · silent for 82 episodes.
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 × that idea's direction ON THIS TICKER × strength, so supporting a bearish idea pushes down, unless this ticker is listed as the other side of it. Not conviction (that lives on the idea); this is direction of travel per person. what w= means
Track record on ORCL
As a PRIMARY play the besties are 0 hit / 0 partial / 1 miss over 1 closed window — credit 0.0, average vs SPY -29.4. Adjacent plays are listed but never scored.
| idea | call | play | result | return | vs SPY | scored |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 🤖 Stargate's $500B is marketing, not a real capex commitment | ▼ SHORT | primary | WRONG | -13.1% | -29.4 | 2026-01-25 |
The tape — what was actually said
every capture on any idea holding ORCL, newest first · quotes verbatim, timestamps deep-link into the episode
Friedberg
support ×2
▼ on
🤖 Stargate's $500B is marketing, not a real capex commitment
E213 · 2025-01-31
▶ 1:05:54
Well, it seems like there's some degree of relationship between the Stargate announcement with Masa and Sam standing up there with Larry and then Sacha showing up in the conversation as well. And this raise and the idea that more hardware, more infrastructure faster creates a moat. And I guess that's the real thing you have to believe, which becomes harder to believe in the context of what happened in the last week.
Friedberg
oppose ×1
▼ on
🤖 Stargate's $500B is marketing, not a real capex commitment
E212 · 2025-01-25
▶ 1:23:41
The obvious consequence of this data center and chip infrastructure effort, which is obviously going to happen with or without government involvement, is an increase in electricity demand.
Chamath
support ×3
▼ on
🤖 Stargate's $500B is marketing, not a real capex commitment
E212 · 2025-01-25
▶ 1:20:28
I think the spending money part, to be honest, is more of a gimmick than it is a technical commitment. So I guess if they want to spend the money, go ahead. ... So I kind of thought that these things were just joint. And so my takeaway was entirely different. It was not a commentary on Mosa or Larry or Sam. I think all of those three companies are frankly very good. It was more a comment that you have to be very careful to protect the president's legacy
Jason
support ×2
▼ on
🤖 Stargate's $500B is marketing, not a real capex commitment
E212 · 2025-01-25
▶ 1:16:18
And I don't know how you get a return on 500 billion invested in this. That's the other thing. And I don't know if that's the real number.
TH
Thomas Laffont
oppose ×2
▼ on
🤖 Stargate's $500B is marketing, not a real capex commitment
E212 · 2025-01-25
▶ 1:15:39
I think to me, the real question, guys, is, do we ultimately believe that you can get an ROI on that 500 billion? Because if you can, there will be people that will want to fund it, right? You can do a data center by data center, you can do it actually at the GPU level, right? So the financing is there. To me, the 500 billion doesn't scare me from an absolute number.