Two companies currently tickle my contrarian fancy, largely because everyone else seems to be briefly distracted by something shinier. They aren’t glamorous. They won’t launch you into orbit. But they might not lose all your money. Which, in the grand scheme of things, is a victory. (It’s a low bar, admittedly. But standards are overrated.)
Five years ago, the company, while perfectly respectable, derived the majority of its income from the frivolous pursuit of gaming. It commenced 2021 with a distinctly ungraceful stumble – a 24% decline prompted by whispers of a ‘shortage’ of graphical processing units. One might have thought it a signal to retreat to more sensible investments. How very predictable, and therefore, how very wrong.
The price used for the sale was $129.00. The market closed at $130.00 that day. A dollar. What’s a dollar, really? It buys less and less, and soon enough, it won’t buy anything at all. But for now, it marks the passage of shares.
I’ve been watching Apple for years, mostly because my brother, a man who genuinely believes Bluetooth is a personal affront, insisted it was a sure thing. He’s usually wrong about everything, but occasionally, even a broken clock… Anyway, I’m starting to think there’s something to this whole Apple business, and it isn’t just avoiding my brother’s smug “I told you so.”
The complete liquidation of the position in Nu Holdings (NU 5.38%) warrants consideration. While Berkshire Hathaway’s initial investment, made during a private seed round preceding the 2021 IPO, represented a departure from typical equity selection criteria, the decision to exit the position raises questions regarding long-term strategic alignment. The rationale, as is often the case with Berkshire’s investment decisions, remains largely undisclosed.
What stands out, though, is a growing tug‑of‑war between spot market folks and perpetual traders, especially on Binance-the platform so entangled with the BNB Smart Chain that it feels less like a marketplace and more like a long, rickety bridge your wallet must cross on a windy day.
The current enthusiasm for nuclear energy, often termed a ‘renaissance,’ is understandable, given anxieties about energy security and the limitations of intermittent renewable sources. However, it is crucial to approach such pronouncements with a degree of skepticism. For those hesitant to speculate on the volatile uranium market, or the unproven technologies of small modular reactor companies, Fluor offers a different route – a stake in the infrastructure, rather than the fuel itself. It is a position that carries its own risks, naturally, but deserves consideration.
They fashion vehicles, these Rivians, primarily for the practicalities of commerce – the delivery van, a tireless workhorse. Amazon, a titan of distribution, offered early succor, a hand extended to help raise this mechanical offspring. A symbiotic arrangement, certainly, but one always shadowed by the larger power. The true test, however, lies not in fulfilling contracts, but in capturing the fickle heart of the individual consumer.
The figures themselves are sterile, devoid of the human drama they represent. A reduction of 25.32% in total holdings… a considerable weight lifted, or a subtle confession of doubt? The direct stake remains untouched, a curious detail. Is it a gesture of continued faith, or a calculated attempt to project an image of stability amidst the prevailing uncertainty?
Months after the thunder, the two titans still debate in a hall of mirrors. Xu, the OKX impresario, has grown bolder in his critique, casting Binance’s actions as the invisible conductor of the crash. Zhao, the founder who built an empire from a keyboard and a dream, maintains a stubborn posture of denial, insisting the catastrophe had other, less glamorous roots.