Serenity @aleabitoreddit

FYI to the AI bears: $NVDA projects $1.3T of hyperscaler spend for 2027. Up from ~$800B in 2026, alongside ~70% revenue growth despite remaining capacity constrained… far above prior Street expectations of ~45%. That capex flows across the AI supply chain… from memory and networking to foundries. Especially through the new bottlenecks/chokepoints that didn’t benefit from older generations. We’re like 2 hours into the party where people started off drinking Sapporo draft beer. Someone spiked Situational’s drinks and we had to pause the party for 30 min. But now it’s back on with tequila shots on the table. I think the real party is about to begin.

I think they just need to spend the time to answer the right questions... If they set themselves up in an interview where the questions to the CEO are leading like: "Why are you bleeding out and how do you stop it" Over.. "Ayar just raised $500m, how do you see your laser ramp with them looking for 2028" You're going to get different responses + reactions.

So far, what I've seen is market volatility stemming from communication failures and noise. Thesis break would be 1. issues with their foundry allocations, since that would affect supply. (But they have 2 now). 2. Or failing qualifications. (they signaled $JBL orders for H1, but we'll see). Fundamentally I think $SIVE is in an amazing spot during a CW laser bottleneck. I also see more potential for Sivers to become a larger optical giant rather than remain just a chokepoint supplier... which is why I focus on company direction a lot more.

Just my final recap on thoughts + fundamentals of $SIVE from ER: Pluggables (1.6T Ramp) for 2027: - $JBL (1.6T LRO, confirmed) Orders H1 2027, Ramp H2 2027 -> -> Likely multiple hyperscaler customers - 3 pluggable makers (evaluation) - 3 pluggable makers (supply assessment) Reference Design for likely H2 2027–28+: - $GFS (Globalfoundries) SCALE (confirmed)) -> -> Likely $AMD and other hyperscalers as CPO customers External Light Sources / Optical Engines for 2027: - $POET (confirmed) -> -> Lumilens / hyperscaler end users - O-Net (confirmed) -> -> Massive ODM/OEM for Hyperscalers + Asia - Likely $AEVA (mapping) -> -> supplying to OE -> hyperscalers / lidar - SemiNex (confirmed) Optical I/O for 2028: - Ayar Labs (confirmed) -> -> Likely $AMD, ALchip, and hyperscaler ASIC program end users + $NVDA NVLink - $MRVL Celestial (potential customer from 2023-2024 disclosures) - Lightmatter (potential customer from 2023-2024 disclosures) - Lightelligence (potential customer from 2023-2024 disclosures) Then potentially $AAPL for 2028 for next-generation wearable updates and other programs from TFLN with Lightium. In terms of capacity allocations: - Win Semi - 1 other foundry (with tremendous allocations) during an InP CW DFB laser shortage. These are all on-going developments/qualifications since Sivers is targeting next-generation SiPH + CW with 1.6T and CPO for 2027-2028. Especially as Goldman Sachs models the CPO opportunity going from effectively near-zero today to ~$91B TAM by 2028. However my criticisms were: => Main focus was not on communicating economic scale of 2027-2028 optical ramps to Western audiences. => Legal vagueposts around NASDAQ listing should be dropped, and clear direction should be set + executed faster on. =>Too much focus was put on defending smaller current revenue/TTM revenue/pipeline conversion (allspace, Tachyon.) relative to future qualifications/partner size/capacity/potential. $SIVE needs to position themselves as a forward looking, global hypergrowth optical company supplying lasers to hyperscaler programs. And not let the narrative get dominated by backward looking metrics. And as Morgan Stanley put it... "Key [CPO] participants include … $LITE, $COHR, and Sivers laser supply". I'm personally a happy $SIVE shareholder for high-beta exposure to the next 2027-2028 optical shift with 1.6T/CPO.

It’s been a little disappointing to see a pattern with some people I've interacted with on X: - try to engage with the same audience, then quickly move toward aggressively monetizing it - get upset when I choose not to participate in or amplify paid groups - throw out personal or illogical attacks and try to reframe that as simply disagreeing over fundamentals When I first joined X, a lot of finance content revolved around watches/private jets + options, paywalled communities promising the "secrets of Wall Street," and squiggly-line charts. One of the things I've wanted to do differently is publish my research and reasoning openly, for everyone. I think this definitely resonated with folks given my follower growth. But of course, this growth can also create friction with people whose business models rely on using X to funnel audiences into paid services or expensive paywalls. My subscription has been $1 for months and will stay at the minimum, despite claims at the beginning I would raise it to $100. All of my core theses are published on the main timeline for free. I could put substantially more behind a paywall. I just don't want to. I just prefer sharing the ideas openly and letting everyone decide for themselves. Many ideas have worked out well: $AXTI, $NBIS, $AEHR, $MU, $INTC, $EWY, $MRVL, $LITE, $RPI, $IQE, $SOI, $TSEM, $ARM, $COHR, and a lot more. Others ran into unexpected industry delays, like $LPKF with glass substrates and Auros with hybrid bonding. Some are still playing out into 2027/2028, including $SIVE, Foci, Shunsin, $CCXI, $XFAB and the broader CPO/humanoid themes. Some are brand new like Etron/ESMT for DDR2/DDR3. And many like $JBL to Murata to $MXL, I just share for fun to see if the idea is right. Not every idea will be right. That's part of research. But I'd much rather have an X where people openly publish the thesis and reasoning so everyone can learn from it. Than one where information increasingly disappears behind $100 paywalls or becomes diluted with engagement-bait noise. Hopefully I can help create a new culture on X rather than amplify the old one.

Okay just to simplify this: There is a guy who eats a lot called $NVDA. Nvidia only wants to buy high-priced potatos off the farmers. A potato farmer $MU, that was selling carrots... now shifted farmland to potatos. Nvidia caused a great potato famine cause they can eat a lot. So everyone else who farmed carrots like SK Hynix and Samsung moved their farmland capacity to grow potato. But... people still need to eat. And carrots are a healthy part of their everyday diet.. Now there's no more carrots aside from a player like "ESMT", the legacy carrot farmer. So now, because everyone buys carrots off ESMT, there's a shortage and the price goes up. So ESMT needs more carrot seeds (from PSMC). But PSMC is running low on carrot seeds to grow the carrots. So PSMC charges ESMT more for the seeds. But the price ESMT sells the carrots at are much higher than what PSMC hikes the carrod seed price. now... ESMT is making enough from selling carrots that it traded 1.9x P/E off July's earnings. Can ESMT keep selling these carrots through 2027? All the other farmers thinks so since it's both hard + low incentive to migrate their valuable potato farms back to carrot farms.

Yep, ESMT (3006) has exposure to multiple legacy memory segments. Has a portfolio of: SLC/SPI NAND, NOR Flash, DDR2/DDR3, MCP/eMCP, so all the fun legacy stuff. If you want to look at broader industry price hikes coming up that ESMT has exposure to: 1. SLC NAND: ~120-170% for H2 2026. 2. DDR2: ~35-40% for Q3 2026. 3. DDR4: +30–40% Q3 (with DDR3 tightening) 4. NOR +60–65%+ for H2 (high density) 5. MCP/eMCP: maybe ~+15–25% QoQ for ESMT from my own estimate For official breakdown: DDR2 + DDR3: ~45% of revenue DDR4/other DRAM ~ 10% of revenue eMCP/MCP ≈30% Analog + other ≈15% Regardless, duration/hikes is the key: -> "none of the major global SLC NAND suppliers plan to add new production capacity in the near term." -> TrendForce specifically expects depleted inventories to make SLC NAND even tighter in Q4. -> Winbond withdrawing DDR2, would make inventory even tighter (and they're doing allocations into 2029-2030) -> ESMT management said the market's main problem was supply, not demand; the company's foundry allocations covered only roughly 60–70% of customer orders -> Nanya: "memory shortages could last through the end of 2027, with supply and demand still tight in 2028" ->Nanya explicitly said capacity constraints could cause shortages across DDR5, LPDDR5, DDR4, LPDDR4 and DDR3. -> ESMT included eMCP among the products receiving order-transfer benefits as mature node resources were being pulled elsewhere ______ If I had to state my thoughts again: I think ESMT's ~1.9x July annualized run-rate P/E could compress further, despite factoring in PSMC's 45% wafer hike due to further legacy memory price hikes. Industry commentary supports durability throughout 2027. Cherry on top is if we start seeing LTAs and visibility into 2029-2030 (but not factored in). I think markets either don't know about this, are mispricing duration, or overestimating PSMC's wafer hike effects. Maybe playing duoQ with Rank 1 Challenger "ESMT" in LoL classic... Is more fun than playing with hardstuck "Micron" in League?

$AXTI would need to hike ASPs of InP substrates to extreme levels you see in memory to see further rerating eg. $20-30B valuations. I think the bottleneck is proven, their chokepoint is proven. However, I don't know what the contracts or LTAs with $LITE and $COHR entail. We'll find out over time (disclosure* own AXT shares).

$MU: goes from $133B -> $1T+ in a year. $RDDT after a 2-month correction: "Garbage stock"

@dxleolibra1003 Cool to see you reaching out to $SIVE IR and it's even better you got a response back from the CEO himself! I do think Sivers' CEO is amazing, just gotta escape local markets.

$AMKR has existing traditional packaging capacity underutilized (like in Philippines), so if that 20%+ deficit is true Probably fills that up at higher prices so that's brrr to nearer term revenue. I still think the main ramp is early 2028 with Arizona once their $TSM + $NVDA stuff takes off.

Missed this mention earlier but IC design insiders reveal that OSAT providers have already warned clients: "traditional packaging capacity could face a deficit exceeding 20% by 2027" (eg. $AMKR, ethereum:0x041ff0e49f6f774e7dc7bd10ee4a14c00b1d80b2, Powertech as potential beneficaries) With: "wire bonding equipment" emerging as the primary bottleneck (ASMPT, $KLIC) -> influx of AI server shipments has triggered a spike in demand for mature chips -> existing mature packaging capacity at OSATs is being rapidly absorbed -> securing early access to traditional packaging capacity is now becoming a challenge Cascading bottleneck patterns are occurring across memory (eg. DDR2, DDR3) and now packaging capacity I guess.

@maroonjacket1 Nah $SIVE CEO is goated, but if you go to a fishermen's market, don't expect many questions outside of fish. Sivers needs to both start treating and communicating themselves as a hypergrowth optical company. Rather than being weighed down by local markets.

@dBooray No I'm still very bullish operationally on $SIVE, and much more so with the additional foundry allocation + 6 pluggable disclosure. I just couldn't get the answers I wanted to from these calls, because the leading questions asked were crap or focused on the wrong things.

Yes. I genuinely don't have a clue why $SIVE still focuses on local Swedish markets for communication/private fundraising. Over the US. The questions you get from Swedish heavy audiences include: - Leading questions like how would you "stop the bleeding" - "Why can't you disclosure your private customers" - Why focus on transceivers (it's obvious) - Implications for non-photonics orders So 1/3rd of the time, the CEO needs to be defending leading/accusatory questions around what "opportunity pipeline means" US analysts would have pressed: - Economic implications from 2 foundry allocations during a bottleneck + ASP hike/operating leverage - Around much capacity revenue would those allocations lead to (half of AOI calls are around those from US analysts) - $GFS NPO/CPO/pluggable scale implications and downstream end customers opportunities - Ayar / CPO player 2028 ramp (that happened to raise $500m+) or other products like ELS production with O-net and TAM opportunities there. - How big those 6 new pluggable players were, rather than asking "why can't you disclosure them" - Clarifying CFO legalposts around listing timeline and M&A TAM expansion opportunities So investors can get a sense of future growth for 2027-2028. Instead, the way leading questions are framed/answers, the entire calls were focused around current financials (which US investors don't care about), non-photonic implications, or skepticism of wording. Rather than exciting US investors about economic implications from their time in a CW laser bottleneck. The more time $SIVE spends in Swedish markets, the more they will be valued as such.

$SIVE direction has already been shared and aligned with what I've agreed with: -> M&A focus (they brought on 2 new related board members) -> NASDAQ listing (already announced plan) -> Capacity during bottleneck (announced new foundry partner) -> Many development/qualifications ongoing Their communication was super far off in this quarter's call. They shouldn't need to spend all their time defending against the useless Swedish market accusations about "opportunity pipeline". And just focus on economic impact of forward growth opportunities + accelerate NASDAQ listing process rather than giving lawyer like disclousres.

Look at the contrast of how Elon Musk communicates in his transcripts. Very forward looking and visionary. And focuses around economic implications of GROWTH areas (eg. humanoids), not weak parts of $TSLA earnings. Sivers transcripts felt like lawyer like disclosures and just going on the defensive defending opportunity pipelines usage with their allspace type contracts.

Communication 100% needs to be better. The CFO statement made me want to throw my phone out the window. "the decision becomes much more a question of market conditions, of investor demand on business momentum and on whether we believe the listing at that moment would create the long-term value for shareholders" This isn't a courtroom??? Even I wouldn't hold the stock if I heard the CFO reiterate this one more time.

Fully dependent on $SIVE execution and int. audience communication. They have: -> tremendous laser capacity during a bottleneck from 2 foundries -> many ongoing qualifications -> capital from $70M fundraise If they want to leverage their way to a Cloud Light/Ayar/Lightmatter type acquisition of a private company. And pull forward NASDAQ listing process by pouring resources to do so, I can see Sivers pulling a fast recovery.

Operationally, Sivers has been doing amazing. Communication wise, it's been subpar and atrocious from the CFO. Just to give you a sense of valuations: $SIVE is cheap enough now that $MRVL could just blow spare change to buy it and vertically integrate their Celestial acquisition.

If I had to be critical of $SIVE earnings: 1. Management underweighted the two disclosures that matter most. -> 6 pluggable engagements -> Foundry capacity (during an industry bottleneck) That's the most important part of the call and should have been the focus to provide economic scale of them. But we got 2-3 sentences about it. And it shouldn't take an Anime avatar on X to talk most about the implications of those. 2. CFO needs retraining or bring on a new one. The lawyer like answers were infuriating to listen to as a shareholder. Even I got pissed off with this statement: "we will evaluate the timing and decide whether the conditions are right to move forward at that particular time." It should be a 100% given by now they file for dual listing to escape hostile Swedish markets. Shareholders didn't fund a future growth type company to hear lawyer-like answers. Again, this was probably one of the worst answers the CFO could have gave and there needs to be firm commitment along with faster timelines. 3. $70M should have gone toward M&A and dual listing. -> Brutally honestly speaking, it's a waste of capital to focus on hybrid manufacturing at this stage and I was disappointed to hear this during this timeframe. It's eventually needed but with 2 foundry suppliers -> You have a ton of new capital and large marketcap. Use it to pull $AVGO style acquisitions of Cloud Light style IP for pluggables or optical engines. Lumilens went from 0 -> $5.5B in 2 years and now with hyperscaler engagements. Sivers should expand out of the laser chokepoint as fast as possible and not stay just a component vendor. And most of all, who cares about competing with customers? If a customer says: "if you do pluggables, we'll go with other players for lasers" who?? $LITE / $COHR / $AAOI reroutes their lasers to internal usage. Lot of your Asian players already allocated. Abuse the current bottleneck as much as possible because there's almost no qualified choices left. And I'm certain all the partners are trying to vertically integrate upward toward the laser level too and compete. If there was a new OE/pluggable accusation attempted during the Q2 time frame, things would have been a lot different. _ TLDR: $SIVE should aim to be the next $LITE and blitzscale like a Silicon Valley company. Use that $70m capital to move faster H2, and at the bare minimum finish readiness then. And expect NASDAQ listing to be finished H1 2027. Not "evaluation" at that timeframe. And use the capital + equity to expand downward into optical engines/ELS/optical transceivers using your equity valuation, and buy a Celestial/Ayar/Cloud Lite type startup. As for the wording of the call, markets care about economic value of the foundry allocation + 6 pluggable players, not other business segments. $SIVE has been extremely conservative to date, but they need to speed up and communicate to forward looking US/Int shareholders. Not geared toward local Swedish audiences who care about Q2/TTM revenue. Otherwise they'll be treated like an Asian component supplier and eventually be valued like an EU one.

I use pipeline revenue as a measure est. quality of their customers relative to previous pipeline revenue estimates. Eg. Q1 $JBL / $GFS $700M+, vs. Q2. 6 pluggable partners added. Not really a good figure to go off for revenue projections, since I’d expect addressable market + ramp to be much better once they expand product lines (eg. More downstream into optical engines or complete pluggables). In the meantime I think it’s better to track $JBL / qualification ramps and wafer capacity modeled into revenue, and assume it gets sold given shortages.

Are Frontier lab relative valuations are too absurd nowadays? If Anthropic IPOs at $2T… 10% of that can buy up almost every major established consumer brand: From: Taco Bell/Pizza Hut/KFC, GAP, American eagle, Levi’s, Victoria’s Secret, Cheesecake Factory, Krispy Kreme… Calvin Klein, Kohls, AMC, Kura Sushi, Dennys, Nike, Build a Bear, Jack in the Box, IHOP, Papa John’s… Shake Shack, Apple Bees, Dave & Busters, Under Armour, Petco, Canada Goose. All together. Using 10% of Anthropic. And they’d still have $51.6B leftover.

所以… 回到存储这边我们现在有： $SKHY CEO 表示: “我们预计[存储]短缺将持续到 2030 年底” $SNDK 表示: “我们看到直到 2030 年，NAND 都存在结构性的巨大需求”非 GAAP 毛利率将维持在约 80%. $NVDA 表示 供应承诺从 1,190 亿美元增加到 2,790 亿美元，主要由存储采购推动…与此同时, 存储定价处于“极端”水平 而且还在继续上涨. Winbond 正在与多家客户就延伸至 2029-2030 年的配额展开讨论. 我之前就说过, 存储需求看起来是结构性的, 而现在从传统 DRAM 到 HBM，需求可见度已经延伸到了未来数年.. 所以我确实认为, 整个板块的远期 p/e 倍数都有进一步上升的机会.

@Ice_Tradingg The market also strongly disagreed when $AXTI was $13.