Pomysły tradingowe z podcastów

We Study Billionaires

RWH072: The Making of A Money Master w/ Rob Vinall

20 wrz 202615h

Rob Vinall of RV Capital explains his evolution to a management-focused, concentrated value investor who targets a '15% owner return' and now holds roughly a third of his portfolio in China. He flags a bifurcated, momentum-driven market where most stocks are down sharply even as the S&P makes highs, and specifically says he bought Constellation Software during the software selloff in March. He also voices strong admiration for Carvana's Ernie Garcia and Meta's Mark Zuckerberg, and lists Luckin Coffee, Tencent, H World and Yum China as attractive founder-led Chinese holdings.

Pozycje · 7

• 1:21:42CSULongVinall bought it in the March software selloff because it is full of owner-operators and has less egregious stock-based compensation, so its owner earnings are real. — Rob Vinall–
  Dlaczego ta transakcja

  “what led you to Constellation Software... you bought it in early March... it's filled with leaders and in many respects filled with founders” — Rob Vinall

  1. He says a theme of his investing is betting on people making a business their life's work, and Constellation is 'very much' that case.
  2. He notes CEO Mark Miller came from the first company Leonard bought and that Constellation avoids the sector's excessive stock-based compensation.
  3. Result: he bought Constellation Software in early March during the 'SaaSpocalypse' software selloff.
• 55:02CVNALongVinall is a long-term holder who thinks founder Ernie Garcia is the epitome of a life's-work founder and that the market's suspicion of his integrity is a total misperception. — Rob Vinall–
  Dlaczego ta transakcja

  “Ernie Garcia is the polarizing figure he is. I mean, he is just... the absolute epitome of the kind of founder building a business into his life's work” — Rob Vinall

  1. He claims he will never understand why Ernie Garcia is such a polarizing figure, calling him the epitome of the founder building a life's work.
  2. He recounts the chin-up story showing Garcia's fierce refusal to lose, evidence of the drive he looks for.
  3. Result: he remains a committed long-term owner despite the 98% drawdown and short-seller attacks.
• 1:00:59METALongVinall admires Zuckerberg as a founder who could stop but keeps working from passion, and sees the widespread criticism of Meta as a misperception to exploit. — Rob Vinall-0,1% od odcinka
  Dlaczego ta transakcja

  “someone like Mark Zuckerberg who so obviously has almost an impossible job balancing all these competing interests... still does, I would argue, from a place of passion” — Rob Vinall

  1. He says it is a mystery why Zuckerberg, who obviously does not need the money, remains such a controversial figure.
  2. He argues people are reflexively negative about large businesses, citing the old Nestle conspiracy as a parallel.
  3. Result: he stays a long-term admirer and holder of Meta.
• 1:11:15LKNCYLongA founder-led Chinese consumer company with a wide moat trading at a very attractive valuation, fitting his 15% owner-return hurdle. — Rob Vinall–
  Dlaczego ta transakcja

  “I'm looking for passionate founders and all of those companies are still run by their founder... I'm looking for wide moats... and attractive valuations” — Rob Vinall

  1. Vinall lists Luckin as a China holding run by its founder with an obvious wide moat.
  2. He expects at least 10% earnings growth plus 5%+ returned via dividends/buybacks, reaching his 15% owner return.
  3. Result: he owns it as part of a one-third China weighting bought while China is out of favour.
• 1:10:29TCEHYLongFounder-led, wide-moat internet giant available cheaply because China is out of favour, with 10%+ earnings growth plus strong capital returns. — Rob Vinall0,0% od odcinka
  Dlaczego ta transakcja

  “ended up with Luckin Coffee... and Tencent Holdings... I would expect the earnings growth to be at the very least 10% in the coming years” — Rob Vinall

  1. He names Tencent among his founder-run Chinese holdings with obvious wide moats.
  2. He says these companies should grow earnings at least 10% and return 5%+ of capital annually.
  3. Result: he holds Tencent and previously Prosus as a discounted way to own it.
• 1:10:53HTHTLongFounder-led Chinese hotel operator with a wide moat bought at an attractive valuation while the market's China perception stays negative. — Rob Vinall–
  Dlaczego ta transakcja

  “And I think H World Group and Yum China Holdings. Mhmm. Like, why why are those four?” — Rob Vinall

  1. Vinall lists H World among the four founder-run Chinese names he owns.
  2. He applies the same criteria as anywhere: passionate founder, wide moat, cheap valuation.
  3. Result: it contributes to the roughly one-third China portfolio weighting.
• 1:11:04YUMCLongFounder-run Chinese restaurant franchise with a wide moat, bought cheap while China remains deeply unpopular with global investors. — Rob Vinall–
  Dlaczego ta transakcja

  “I'm very conscious when I invest in China that I don't speak the language... keep it very simple... looking for passionate founders” — Rob Vinall

  1. He lists Yum China as one of his four founder-led Chinese holdings.
  2. Same screening criteria: founder still running it, wide moat, attractive price.
  3. Result: part of the one-third of the fund invested in China.

We Study Billionaires

TIP847: Alphabet (GOOGL): The Megacap That Still Might Be Underrated w/ Kyle Grieve & Shawn O’Malley

17 wrz 202687h

Pozycje · 2

• 1:19:07GOOGLLongWorld-class collection of businesses (Search, YouTube, Cloud, Waymo, SpaceX stake) that keeps compounding, but with the stock near fair value the right move is to hold, not add. — Kyle Grieve+1,2% od odcinka
  Dlaczego ta transakcja

  “If we were speaking strictly rationally, then selling is actually probably the right decision... the best move with Google given that we already own it is to just do nothing and let the position play out.” — Kyle Grieve

  1. Shawn/Sean argue Alphabet is a 'titan' with a much higher intrinsic value in 5-10 years and a $500bn cloud backlog driving 50% cloud growth over two years.
  2. It is their second-largest portfolio position at ~14% with cost basis near $150, up over 90%; they bought more on the regulatory dip.
  3. Conclusion: don't add here since it is 'much closer to being fairly valued,' but don't sell either because they are long-term owners of wonderful businesses.
• 46:09UBERLongShawn prefers Uber to Waymo: Uber does tens of millions of rides per day with billions in profits, while Waymo burns cash and its valuation is speculative. — Shawn O'Malley-1,2% od odcinka
  Dlaczego ta transakcja

  “As an Uber shareholder, I would say I'm pretty skeptical of Waymo being able to grow into this valuation.” — Shawn O'Malley

  1. Waymo's last private round valued it near $130bn, roughly matching Uber's market value.
  2. Shawn says it is 'pretty obscene for Waymo to have the same valuation as Uber' given Uber's proven, scaling, profitable model versus Waymo's unproven economics.
  3. He states 'as an Uber shareholder... I'm pretty skeptical of Waymo being able to grow into this valuation,' i.e. Uber is the better business model.

Pomysły · 4

• 46:09WaymoUnikaćWaymo's ~$130bn valuation looks stretched: it is still burning cash, unproven as a business model, and faces competitor AV breakthroughs that could erode its first-mover edge. — Shawn O'Malley–
  Dlaczego ta transakcja

  “Waymo is still in the cash burn phase, it's losing a ton of money and its viability as a business model has not been proven. It's entirely speculative.” — Shawn O'Malley

  1. Waymo has driven 127m autonomous miles and runs ~500k rides/week, but remains in the cash-burn phase per Shawn.
  2. Its February funding round valued it near $130bn, comparable to Uber despite vastly smaller scale and no profits.
  3. Shawn treats Waymo's value to Alphabet as 'all gravy' optionality from a future IPO but is skeptical it can grow into that valuation.
• 1:01:42NVDALongNvidia is a clear beneficiary of the AI capex supercycle with 65% operating margins and pricing power, effectively taxing every hyperscaler except Google's TPU-based stack. — Kyle Grieve+2,3% od odcinka
  Dlaczego ta transakcja

  “Nvidia is a very, very good company. It has 65% operating margins as well as pricing power. So, you know, that's great for Nvidia, but obviously it's not so great for its customers.” — Kyle Grieve

  1. The BofA chart cited shows hyperscaler free cash flow turning negative while semiconductor designers/manufacturers' cash flows 'skyrocketed'.
  2. Kyle notes Nvidia has 65% operating margins and pricing power, and that all the neo-clouds must pay this 'Nvidia tax'.
  3. Google's own TPUs come at a ~40% discount to Nvidia equivalents, underlining how much value Nvidia captures from the rest of the industry.
• 1:00:49CRWVUnikaćCoreWeave remains unprofitable and faces a structural disadvantage: unlike Alphabet it must pay the Nvidia tax, has no internal demand to fill idle capacity, and rents compute by the hour. — Kyle Grieve-6,0% od odcinka
  Dlaczego ta transakcja

  “Even if you are making a complaint about Google's appreciation being artificially low, they're still probably much more profitable than either Nebius or CoreWeave is today.” — Kyle Grieve

  1. Kyle identifies CoreWeave and Nebius as the best pure-play AI data center comps, but notes 'both businesses today remain unprofitable.'
  2. Alphabet's vertical integration (TPUs ~40% cheaper than Nvidia) and internal demand (Search, YouTube, Gemini) give it a profitability edge.
  3. Shawn warns neo-clouds like CoreWeave could struggle to 'keep the lights on with too much unused capacity' if Alphabet's advantages keep growing.
• 1:00:49NBISUnikaćNebius prices AI compute per megawatt and remains unprofitable; it lacks Alphabet's internal demand and vertical integration, so its economics are less durable. — Kyle Grieve-1,2% od odcinka
  Dlaczego ta transakcja

  “The problem with both businesses is that they just today remain unprofitable.” — Kyle Grieve

  1. Kyle cites Nebius as a pure-play AI compute lessor alongside CoreWeave, noting both are unprofitable today.
  2. Nebius's pricing doubled in six months and it says its 2027 capacity could be sold out, but the per-megawatt disclosure is ambiguous and hard to underwrite.
  3. Alphabet's ability to redirect compute internally ('all the rooms are filled') gives it a structural cost edge over Neo Clouds like Nebius.

We Study Billionaires

TIP846: Stock Picker: How to Live Off Your Portfolio w/ Ian Cassel

13 wrz 2026183h

Brak konkretnych zagrań w tym odcinku

We Study Billionaires

TIP845: Copart Stock (CPRT): Is Copart Now a Buy? w/ Daniel Mahncke & Shawn O'Malley

10 wrz 2026255h

Daniel and Shawn analyze Copart (CPRT) after its recent pullback, discussing its moats, competitive threats from IAA and Progressive, and the CEO transition from Jeff Liaw back to Jay Adair. They conclude Copart is a high-quality business but is fairly valued at current prices with decelerating growth, and they decide to pass on adding it to their portfolio for now, waiting for a potentially cheaper entry point. They also mention a rumored acquisition of CCC Intelligent Solutions and international expansion as growth catalysts.

▶Obejrzyj na YouTube

Pomysły · 2

• ▶ 1:06:49CPRTLongI don't feel like Copart is, you know, the opportunity that now stands out to me when I look at the rest of our portfolio, where I immediately feel like we gotta sell, you know, one of the companies, then make it happen and buy Copart. — Daniel Mahncke–
  Dlaczego ta transakcja

  “I don't feel like Copart is, you know, the opportunity that now stands out to me when I look at the rest of our portfolio, where I immediately feel like we gotta sell, you know, one of the companies, then make it happen and buy Copart.” — Daniel Mahncke

  1. They highlight risks: declining volume from insurers like Progressive, a recent CEO change, and the potential for market share loss to IAA, which tempers their enthusiasm.
  2. Despite acknowledging upside if growth reaccelerates, they decide to pass for now, waiting for a better entry or more evidence of a turnaround.
• ▶ 1:01:27CCC Intelligent SolutionsLongDaniel notes CCC's stock is down ~27% with price-to-operating-cash-flow at ~10x, and it could be a strategic fit for Copart if acquired, though this is speculative based on a rumor. — Daniel Mahncke–
  Dlaczego ta transakcja

  “And I think currently, CCC's stock is down about 27%, so close to 30% over the past year, and price to operating cash flow has declined from over 30 to about 10 times.” — Daniel Mahncke

  1. Daniel discusses the rumored takeover of CCC by Copart, noting CCC's software sits between insurers and repair shops, and has 300 insurers and 27 of top 30 as customers.
  2. He sees potential synergies like faster cycle times and natural hedging, and mentions the stock is cheap at ~10x OCF due to slowing growth and AI fears.
  3. However, this is a rumor with no confirmed deal, and he has not deeply researched it, so any investment is speculative.

We Study Billionaires

TIP844: Uber (UBER): The Autonomy Referendum — Is Mr. Market Completely Wrong? w/ Daniel Mahncke & Shawn O’Malley

6 wrz 2026351h

Hosts Daniel Mahncke and Shawn O’Malley revisit Uber (UBER), reinforcing their bullish long-term thesis despite the stock being flat and market fears over autonomous vehicles, especially Waymo. They argue Uber's multiple has compressed while profits doubled, AV threats are overstated near-term, and Uber's platform strategy, partnerships, and Delivery Hero acquisition position it for growth. The most actionable view is a clear 'long' on Uber, with high conviction.

Pozycje · 1

• 1:08:11UBERLongUber is undervalued as the market overly discounts AV competition; margins are expanding, growth compounds ~20%, and the company is diversifying via Delivery Hero and AV partnerships. — Daniel Mahncke-6,9% od odcinka
  Dlaczego ta transakcja

  “I feel even more confident now than I did prior because a lot of news is about Waymo... In reality, Waymo is competing with all other AV players.” — Daniel Mahncke

  1. Daniel and Shawn state Uber's operating margins swung from -43% to +12% (2020-2026) and profits roughly doubled while the multiple compressed from ~55x to ~22x operating profits.
  2. They argue AVs are only ~0.1% of global rideshare today and that Uber's flexible human-driver network plus 20+ AV partnerships protect its aggregation role.
  3. Given the fatter margin profile, expanded Delivery Hero footprint, and $20B buyback, the stock should re-rate materially higher.

Pomysły · 2

• 1:00:06DHER.DELongThe acquisition by Uber at a full price (~$14.8B) adds global delivery markets and creates synergy opportunities, but it's a strategic move more than an undervalued standalone. — Shawn O’Malley–
  Dlaczego ta transakcja

  “Delivery Hero brings them 50 million new consumers and two dozen new markets to run that playbook in... extension of Uber One into all of those places.” — Shawn O’Malley

  1. Uber launched a formal offer for Delivery Hero valuing it at about $14.8B, with Prosus committed to tendering shares, making deal success likely.
  2. Delivery Hero brings 50M new consumers and 24 new markets, enabling Uber to cross-sell and expand Uber One, increasing revenue and margins.
  3. While not a direct recommendation, the deal underpins Uber's thesis and reduces risk through geographic diversification.
• 26:30GOOGLShortWaymo → Waymo's $126B private valuation is excessive relative to its ride volumes, implying either Waymo is overvalued or Uber is undervalued; more likely Waymo overvalued. — Shawn O’Malley+2,9% od odcinka
  Dlaczego ta transakcja

  “Private markets valuing Waymo at roughly the same valuation as all of Uber. A company that... has $10 billion in free cash flow. So somebody has to be wrong here.” — Shawn O’Malley

  1. Waymo raises $16B at $126B post-money, while Uber does 3B trips/quarter with $10B FCF and has a ~$126B market cap.
  2. AV rides are tiny (<0.1% of market), and Waymo faces competition from other AV makers; its capital burden and regulatory risks are high.
  3. Avoid or potentially short Alphabet due to Waymo's capital deployment, but this is speculative.

We Study Billionaires

TIP843: AppLovin (APP): The 30-Bagger Down More Than Half w/ Kyle Grieve & Shawn O'Malley

3 wrz 2026423h

Kyle and Sean analyze AppLovin (APP), a mobile advertising platform that has fallen over 50% in 2026 despite strong growth. They appreciate its high margins and returns on invested capital but ultimately pass on the stock due to competitive and AI risks, unclear disclosures, and reliance on an algorithm. They prefer to stay within their circle of competence, declining to buy even after the selloff.

Pomysły · 1

• 1:30:47APPUnikaćKyle and Sean both conclude that AppLovin is too hard to understand given competitive threats, algorithm dependence, and unclear disclosures, and they choose to pass on owning it despite potential upside. — Speaker 2-3,0% od odcinka
  Dlaczego ta transakcja

  “I just personally think this one is too hard for me... we've mentioned Trade Desk a few times today and it really has become our go-to example of why you should stay in your circle of competence.” — Speaker 2

  1. They note AppLovin's business is dependent on a proprietary algorithm and faces intense competition from Google, Meta, and Unity, making it hard to predict.
  2. They cite The Trade Desk as a cautionary example of a similar company that kept falling despite value appearance.
  3. They decide to stay within their circle of competence and avoid AppLovin because they lack confidence in understanding the nuances of programmatic advertising.

We Study Billionaires

TIP842: Comfort Systems USA (FIX): The Five-Bagger We Passed On w/ Kyle Grieve & Shawn O'Malley

30 sie 2026519h

The hosts revisit Comfort Systems USA (FIX), a stock they previously passed on, which has since become a five-bagger driven by AI/data center spending. They analyze the original thesis, the massive growth in revenue, margins, and backlog, and debate whether the current valuation is justified. Both hosts conclude that despite the excellent business, the stock is too expensive and risky to buy now, preferring to stay on the sidelines and wait for a better entry point. They also discuss the wider AI CapEx cycle and regulatory changes that could signal a bubble.

Pomysły · 1

• 1:18:44FIXUnikaćDespite being a great business benefiting from AI data center tailwinds, the stock has run up ~5x and trades well above intrinsic value, making it a speculative momentum bet rather than a prudent investment. — Sean O'Malley–
  Dlaczego ta transakcja

  “I just couldn't get comfortable owning it at a price that didn't more significantly hedge some of the downside risks, which I don't think are being priced in fully today.” — Sean O'Malley

  1. Shane notes that the business is fundamentally strong with massive backlog growth, but he admits his original estimate of $320 fair value was far too conservative, and the stock no
  2. Kyle's intrinsic value model estimates fair value at $1,600, a small discount to the current price, before applying any margin of safety.
  3. Both hosts conclude that the high valuation and uncertainty around AI spending sustainability make buying now too risky, so they choose to avoid and wait for a better entry point.

We Study Billionaires

TIP841: Palantir – Palantir is Cheaper than I Thought! w/ Daniel Mahncke & Shawn O’Malley

27 sie 2026591h

Daniel Mahncke pitches Palantir as a potential investment, arguing that despite its high multiples, the company's explosive growth and expanding margins make it more attractively valued than it appears, especially after the recent earnings jump. He acknowledges he doesn't fully understand the business and ultimately recommends staying on the sidelines, with a possible entry below $100. Sean O'Malley agrees, noting the difficulty in valuing Palantir and the speculative nature of investing in it.

▶Obejrzyj na YouTube

Pozycje · 1

• ▶ 1:14:10PLTRUnikaćDespite impressive growth and margins, Palantir's complexity and dependence on continued top-line growth make it too difficult to understand, so the hosts recommend not investing at current prices. — Daniel Mahncke-0,6% od odcinka
  Dlaczego ta transakcja

  “I think the two of us would probably be better off sitting on the sidelines just admiring what Palantir is doing and not investing today.” — Daniel Mahncke

  1. Daniel admits he doesn't fully understand the technology and cites the risk of growth deceleration without clear visibility into causes.
  2. The stock's high valuation leaves little margin of safety if growth slows.
  3. The hosts conclude that investing without understanding is speculation, not investment, so they avoid it.

Pomysły · 1

• ▶ 1:16:39PLTRLongDaniel suggests that if Palantir's stock falls below $100, it could become an attractive entry point for those willing to speculate on continued growth. — Daniel Mahncke-0,6% od odcinka
  Dlaczego ta transakcja

  “if you see the stock below $100 and nothing changes, count me in” — Daniel Mahncke

  1. Daniel values Palantir at $240 fair value under Karp's growth assumptions, implying upside at lower prices.
  2. He notes that before earnings, at $130, the valuation was 'kind of reasonable' if growth persists.
  3. He states he would be 'count me in' if the stock drops below $100 without any change in fundamentals.

We Study Billionaires

TIP840: CATL: Powering EVs, Power Grids, and AI w/ Stig Brodersen, Manish Karira & Ralph Summerford

23 sie 2026687h

The episode is a bull-bear debate on CATL, the world's largest battery maker. The bull case highlights CATL's dominant 40% market share, competitive moat, and underappreciated growth engines in AI data center energy storage and the LRS licensing model. The bear case focuses on price deflation, geopolitical risks, reliance on supplier float, and competitive threats. No explicit buy or sell recommendations are made; the discussion is analytical with the bull estimating potential returns.

Pomysły · 2

• 55:31CATLLongCATL is more than a battery maker; it's becoming the backbone of energy infrastructure with AI data center storage as an underappreciated growth engine, and the LRS licensing model could add high-margin revenue. — Speaker 2–
  Dlaczego ta transakcja

  “CATL is not just an EV battery play. It has the potential to become the backbone of the future energy infrastructure and increasingly for the AI data centers.” — Speaker 2

  1. Manish argues CATL's competitive advantages (scale, switching costs, product complexity) are well understood but the AI data center storage and licensing growth engines aren't pric
  2. CATL is the #1 energy storage supplier with higher margins in storage, and the LRS model (e.g., Ford deal) could provide capital-light royalty income.
  3. If these growth engines materialize, the business could roughly double in value in five years, supporting a 15% annual return estimate.
• 36:11CATLUnikaćRalph's bear case centers on price deflation eroding revenue, a potential unwind of supplier float, and geopolitical risks that could sever access to the US market and royalty income. — Speaker 3–
  Dlaczego ta transakcja

  “Accepting a mere three to 4% royalty fee turns that invisible king you mentioned into a low rent IP landlord.” — Speaker 3

  1. Ralph highlights that CATL reported volume growth but revenue contraction due to price deflation, calling it a 'treadmill effect' with temporary margins.
  2. The high operating cash flow relative to profit relies on stretching supplier payables, which Chinese regulators are pressuring to shorten, potentially reducing buybacks/dividends.
  3. Geopolitical risks and reliance on a licensing model that could be canceled with a 'stroke of a pen' make the stock risky.

We Study Billionaires

TIP839: Domino's Pizza (DPZ): Is the Royalty Engine Still Running? w/ Kyle Grieve & Shawn O’Malley

20 sie 2026759h

Kyle Grieve and Shawn O'Malley analyze Domino's Pizza (DPZ), exploring its franchise royalty model, capital allocation, and recent struggles with slowing growth and heavy debt. Kyle presents a base-case valuation of $383 per share but concludes he would pass on the stock due to weak competitive advantages, GLP-1 health trends, and insider selling, while Shawn similarly avoids it unless the price drops to about 8x earnings. Both hosts decline to invest, citing headwinds and lack of catalysts.

Pozycje · 2

• 1:15:59DPZUnikaćKyle would pass on Domino's because it lacks compelling competitive advantages, faces GLP-1 health headwinds, and the stock remains expensive with limited growth prospects. — Kyle Grieve–
  Dlaczego ta transakcja

  “I'm fine just taking a complete pass on Domino's.” — Kyle Grieve

  1. Kyle states the business is 'still expensive' and 'unlikely to grow that much in revenue,' with no margin expansion expected.
  2. He cites large-scale shifts in customer preferences toward healthier eating and GLP-1 drugs as tangible headwinds.
  3. Given these factors, he concludes, 'I'm fine just taking a complete pass on Domino's.'
• 1:17:07DPZUnikaćShawn would avoid Domino's because the brand conflicts with healthier eating trends, the securitization structure limits cash flow discretion, and there is no clear catalyst. — Shawn O'Malley–
  Dlaczego ta transakcja

  “it's not something I would personally be invested in. Yeah, if we could get it at like eight times earnings, I would look at it, but not so much today.” — Shawn O'Malley

  1. Shawn notes the 'brand, I think, is really at odds with this movement toward eating healthier and GLP-1s.'
  2. He dislikes the whole business securitization that mortgages assets and gives creditors priority claims, limiting management's control.
  3. He concludes, 'unless it were a really bargain bin price, it's not something I would personally be invested in.'