Chris Camillo @ChrisCamillo

It’s actually a bit larger, but if you view this figure as a negative you’re missing the big picture. The tailwind for $HOOD is massive as its young account base ages and contributes tens of trillions in career wage growth savings and inheritance to their portfolios.

Been bombarded all day for my take on $PLTR. After ~100hrs of deep research and a year being heavily leveraged, I exited most of my position this Summer. Not due to lost faith in the company/thesis or valuation (I don’t trade PE), but because the info that excited me last August is now widely known. In social arb terms, we’ve hit information parity, for now. This is how I trade every position.

@Codicil_Capital @sama You’re focused on Google’s value, I’m focused on trading how new info spreads. Google dropped 9% in hours after Eddie Cue said Safari search was down, then bounced once Google defended growth. If it’s revealed AI queries are behind search growth, stock takes a hit. That said, my

@TAlbin13604 If the Google Trends data on Lululemon were clean, answer would be yes as that’s the strongest supporting datapoint. But with AI queries polluting it, hard to push my $LULU long thesis above low-mid conviction. Sticking with a moderate-sized trade.

@nw3 Competitor ChatGPT drives most AI queries right now, giving it control of most consumer AI distribution. Any search traffic it pushes to Google from those queries is temporary and likely to be pulled back as their app and internally developed ad engine evolves. As investors, the

@nw3 I think for $SPHR it would be less about the revenue and more about the value of Taylor Swift’s endorsement of the venue for other artists

Anyone else playing $SPHR off the Taylor Swift residency chatter?

@amitisinvesting Thanks, that’s the point atleast for their ad clients. For me and every social arb trader, Google needs to figure out how to filter or classify AI traffic in GTrends.

@amitisinvesting Small short position, so don’t read too much into that. The point of this thread is to push Google to clarify how AI-originating traffic is classified for advertisers and to restore data integrity to Google Trends for consumer research.

@bbquedveggies I hope not. Google needs to fix this which is mostly why I constructed this thread

@cryptoinsider22 Even under the assumption that those Gtrend charts are inflated I’m still very long $LULU

@Chris00847463 Appears to be inflated, not fully artificial. I’m still very long $LULU

11/11 If you’re seeing AI-generated search traffic or Google Trends anomalies, reply with receipts. If I’m missing something or misinterpreting, push back. Disclosure: Short $GOOGL, seeking truth and transparency in Google’s policies and disclosures.

10/11 Why it matters: advertisers could be unknowingly paying for AI traffic. Investors and analysts leaning on Google Trends data may be misled. And Google’s stock at all-time highs could be partly built on revenue from query growth that isn’t human. If Google is pushed to disclose and bill separately for AI vs human queries, expect volatility.

9/11 Now, Google Ads. This is where the money is made, and where policy clarity matters. Google says you don’t pay for invalid clicks but isn’t it suspicious that their Adwords policy does not mention clicks from AI apps or chatbots? If AI traffic is interacting with ads, advertisers may be paying for it without knowing the true value of that AI engagement.

7/11 I suspected AI might be driving these odd patterns, so I ran a micro test. Phrase “organic abercrombie socks” had 0 search history as it’s a made-up product category. After a handful of ChatGPT prompts, it showed up in Trends within 24h. Trends docs say Google filters out its own AI searches, but make no mention of external AIs like ChatGPT. The socks test suggests AI traffic leaks through.

5/11 Let’s talk about Google Trends. Investors treat it as a clean read on relative search volume, but recently when stacked against other signals, the picture doesn’t line up. Lululemon product terms (leggings, bras, tops, shorts, joggers, bags) are spiking this summer to holiday-level highs. In nearly two decades analyzing Google Trends data, I’ve never seen a mature brand’s products broadly spike like this outside peak seasonality. Implausible given that card swipes, web traffic, app engagement, and store traffic show only modest improvement. And it’s not just Lululemon…

4/11 Google’s response: “We continue to see overall query growth in Search.” Q2 showed $54.2B in Search revenue, +12% YoY. But this came right after Apple testified that human searches are falling. How is that possible?

3/11 Example: Apple’s Eddy Cue testified Safari searches fell for the first time in 22 years because of AI use. Alphabet stock dropped ~9% that day.

2/11 Evidence is piling up that people using AI queries through ChatGPT are generating Google searches and clicks at scale. That can mask slowing human search activity while still printing "growth."

1/11 🧵 THREAD: Google’s reported search query growth may be AI-driven, not human.

@Dewey_Capital @jbulltard1 Totally understand. $LULU is only medium conviction right now and evolving daily as I surface new data. I like giving my chartist friends a hard time, but they know it’s all love. Appreciate the kind words.

@PokeBearGuru @Mr_Derivatives Only medium conviction on $LULU

If you think Apple missed the mark on AI, what they’re cooking up in the robotics lab is looking to be a trainwreck of epic proportions. https://t.co/pemtuujWnL

@wook_404 I’m seeing several recent positives at $LULU others seem to be missing. We’ll find out soon enough if I’m right.