Hunter retweeted
I regret to inform you that nobody cares about your potential. Potential is nothing without execution. When you're young, everyone cares about your potential. You get used to focusing on it. But as you get older, no one cares about your potential. Just your delivery against it.
Hunter retweeted
"Plz help us Mr. Regulator, sir, we don't want to compete fairly and still fail bc we suck."
AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile are jointly lobbying the FCC to preserve existing rules as @SpaceX moves closer to launching its own independent cellular network that would compete directly with the three major U.S. carriers.
On Oct 20th, reps from all three major U.S. wireless carriers met with FCC officials to push back against proposed changes that would give satellite companies more freedom to offer cellular service.
The carriers urged the FCC to:
• Block satellite companies from using certain 5G frequencies currently used by wireless carriers.
• Keep rules requiring satellite companies to get permission from wireless carriers before using their licensed spectrum.
• Allow wireless carriers to maintain control over these agreements, including the ability to end them.
• Reconsider proposed interference limits to protect existing cellular networks.
Based on all the public communications from these carriers, and the lobbying, they are clearly worried that SpaceX's @Starlink Mobile network is going to be a major competitor to them. Starlink Mobile will become the first network operator to deploy both satellite and terrestrial spectrum.
The FCC recently announced that they are considering new rules that could make it easier for satellite companies like SpaceX to offer cellular service without relying as heavily on existing wireless carriers, so this is partly what the three big carriers are fighting against.
Hunter retweeted
$SPCX ABSOLUTELY CRUSHED THEIR Q3 EARNINGS
• Revenue $14.6B vs Est. $13.0B
• EPS $0.35 vs Est. $0.16
• EBITDA $8.8B vs Est. $6.6B
• CapEx: $19.6B
Fund managers are the most overweight tech since 2020.
You know what happens when everyone's on the same side of the boat?
Every long-term investor is a short-term trader whose trade didn't work out.
The only difference is they stopped checking.
Same $300/month. Same 7%. Same age 65.
Start at 25: ~$787K
Start at 35: ~$366K
Waiting 10 years cost more than half the outcome. You paid for only 3 fewer years of contributions.
Best time to start was earlier. Second best is this month.
Before every trade, I ask:
1What's the thesis in one sentence?
2Where am I wrong?
3How much do I lose if I'm wrong?
4Is the reward at least 2x the risk?
5Would I take this again tomorrow?
Can't answer all five? No trade yet.
Repost if you've skipped step 2 before.
You don't need to win most of your trades.
Risk $1 to make $3 and you break even at a 25% win rate.
Risk $1 to make $0.50 and you need 67% just to break even.
Reward-to-risk matters more than being right.
"Buy the dip," they said.
Nobody mentioned the dip has a basement.
And the basement has a sub-basement.
$100K. 30 years. Same 7% gross return.
0.03% fee: ~$755K
1.00% fee: ~$574K
A "small" 1% fee costs you about $180K.
Fees are the only guaranteed return you can control.
Day trading is tuition for a university that doesn't give diplomas.
The textbooks are expensive.
The professor is the market. The final exam is every day.
Down 10% needs +11% to recover.
Down 50% needs +100%.
Down 70% needs +233%.
Losses are not symmetrical.
This is why the first rule of investing is: don't take the loss that ends your game.
















