Cantor Fitzgerald’s Andres Sheppard, a man who seems to speak in riddles and stock tips, gave EVgo another nod before the week began. He declared it a “buy” and set a price target so lofty it might as well have been written in a foreign language. That $7 mark, he claimed, would grant investors a 51% boost-a return that would make even a penny-pincher’s eyes widen.
The spark? A $5 billion investment from Nvidia-a deal so large it makes you wonder if the check was printed in Comic Sans to fit the page. The agreement, dubbed a “multigeneration partnership,” involves Intel crafting custom CPUs for Nvidia’s AI data centers, while Nvidia lends a hand (or a GPU) to spruce up Intel’s PC offerings. It’s the semiconductor equivalent of two giants trading hats and pretending it’s a business strategy.
The stock has bounced up and down like a toddler on a sugar rush, spiking nearly 90% last week before taking a breather. Investors, in their infinite wisdom, are trying to figure out what this chip company might actually be worth after emerging from bankruptcy. Because, of course, bankruptcy is where all the exciting corporate drama happens, right?
The fateful summit with regulators occurred on Tuesday, where Replimune’s RP1-a cancer drug partnered with Bristol Myers Squibb‘s Opdivo-was dissected with the precision of a surgeon and the enthusiasm of a tax audit. The June “complete response letter” from the FDA had already cast a shadow over the drug’s prospects, but this meeting merely confirmed what seasoned investors have always known: hope is a poor substitute for due diligence.
Lam Research, for all its technical brilliance, had the good taste to remain entirely uneventful on this particular day. Its stock’s upward trajectory, however, was less a product of its own doings and more a side effect of two of its clients-Nvidia and Intel-engaging in what can only be described as a high-stakes game of cosmic Monopoly. The rules? Something about custom data centers, PC products, and “accelerating applications.” The details, like all such corporate alchemy, are best left to the professionals (and perhaps a team of philosophers with a strong coffee habit).
At the dawn of this fateful day, the company, once merely a whisper among titans, made a declaration that rippled through the atmosphere like the tolling of a bell. Its pact with UZ Energy, sealed in the fervor of late July, would cost SES approximately $25.5 million-a sum seemingly paltry in the grand tapestry of capitalistic enterprise, yet heavy with implication. The inevitability of financial performance weighed upon this figure like the burden of guilt beneath which the soul heaves.
Now hold onto your monocles-wallets holding between 10,000 and 100,000 shiny coins have gulped down 820 ETH, which, by my calculations (and a bit of wizardry), is roughly $3.8 BILLION in the last 72 hours. That’s enough Ethereum to make Scrooge McDuck dive headfirst-31 million ETH swimming around their wallets right now. Swimming, I say! 🏊♂️💸
Picture this: Ethereum struts around $4,605 like it owns the place, but it’s politely knocking under the $4,638-$4,665 velvet ropes of resistance. The buyers? Oh, they’re playing security guard around $4,520-$4,547, backed by some fancy exponential moving averages (EMAs)-or as I like to call them, “EMA-nently crucial support.” Despite the U.S. Federal Reserve’s looming decisions (which are spookier than a horror flick), Ethereum’s trend says, “I’m still in the game, baby!”
Patel, that paragon of bureaucratic foresight, found himself in a Congressional hearing ostensibly about matters far more consequential than doughnuts. Yet when asked about government officials’ stock portfolios-a topic as dry as a stale cronut-he casually mentioned seeing “a good investment opportunity” in Krispy Kreme. One might as well ask a teapot about the meaning of life and receive a dissertation on tea leaves. Patel had already disclosed his stake months prior, but the delay in SEC filings created a fog of uncertainty: Was this a holding, a hedge, or a particularly sweet dream?
For the discerning contrarian, the proposition arises: should one aloofly regard their $5,000-a sum untainted by life’s pressing obligations-as an opportunity for investment? Perhaps indulging in the peculiar delights of two illustrious tech stocks might just be the affronting act of rebellion we require in these uncertain times.