ARKUSDT
Ark / Tether USD
crypto Composite

Not many, I still remember the days of everyone pumping the ARK funds 😂

We have a decade of evidence now that the rate of his product successes is far lower than a coin flip. When he's commenting on his vaporware, I would honestly put it closer to 90-95% of the time he's outright lying and has no real idea about whether a product or technology is possible, and certainly he has no idea when it will be ready. In fact, he most likely has a clear idea that his promised products won't be ready within the timelines he's suggesting, which IMO would make those timeline claims outright lies as well.
That said, he does increase his chances of success if he just perpetually claims the product's delivery is a year out, and gullible investors keep loading his companies with investment money.
Do you know what the success rate is for any technology if you literally can never run out of money, no matter how many times you've been proven a liar about timelines and deliverables? It's much higher than actually being taken to task with investments being pulled, which result in your company running out of money for R&D.
I mean, think about that. A lot of autonomous vehicle experts seem to agree that vision only was a bad idea. Imagine where we could be today if Tesla wasn't sucking up all of the investment capital, and that money was invested into other companies working on better approaches... More or less, Tesla's been acting as a vampire, sucking the the lifeblood (money) out of other potential innovative companies, and concentrating all eyes and efforts on their solution. Ironically, Waymo, valued at far far less than Tesla, has been progressing quicker to actually deliver real autonomous service across multiple major cities in the US, and has plans for methodical expansion.
>For example, I don’t mind FSD ends up being 20 years late, as long as Tesla ends up being the first with a million operational robotaxis.
It actually does matter how late it is. It's the difference between an OTA update suddenly launching a million robotaxis into a virgin market where Tesla is quickly handed a monopoly, wiping out all ride sharing services overnight, and being able to demand equivalent fares to those former ride sharing services, except without the cost of a driver, making the service massively profitable.
That was the promise made in April 2019. Musk got on stage and started making his ridiculous claims, one being that fully autonomous driving (FSD) would be feature complete and operational by the end of 2019, and that a million robotaxis would suddenly come online across the entire US by mid 2020; over 5.5 years ago.
The later it takes to deliver, the more likely there will already be competition or new players entering the scene shortly thereafter. In fact there already is growing competition. Waymo, Zoox, and May Mobility are already offering autonomous taxi service in multiple cities, with Waymo clearly growing the fastest of any other company (including Tesla who doesn't actually have a fully autonomous service in operation), and is already targeting some of the largest markets in the US and internationally.
Further, companies like Lucid and Mercedes want to get into the game too, with Mercedes and likely a large group of other companies looking to build out a system using the new Nvidia systems, which seems like it'll make it far easier for companies to team up, share data, and share algorithmic developments, all using a common hardware structure to rapidly develop their own services. If all those sensors Nvidia is offering in their solution are redundant and ultimately unnecessary, they can be stripped out. How about Tesla's solution, is it easier to add more sensors if needed?
The more competition, the more downward price pressure there is on autonomous taxi service and the less profitability.... for every company involved.
Tesla's been promising that autonomous taxis was, in of itself, a trillion dollar product for the company, but those claims were made with the assumption that it would be a simple matter of one day launching an OTA update and the next day there being a million Tesla taxis running completely autonomously in every part of the US, no geofencing, no further employee testing/training necessary, no remote monitoring... because all of the above cost time and money, increasing costs, slowing the rate of revenue increase, and driving down profitability.
The longer it takes Tesla, presuming they ever launch a nationwide robotaxi service outside of specifically geofenced areas... the more competition increases, and the less profitable this service is for Tesla, which makes all of the ridiculous valuations, put out by funds like ARK with their stock pumper extraordinaries like Cathie Wood, null and void.
Tesla's trial in Austin should be far more concerning than investors are letting on, because it proves that Musk's claims are false. It may take up to a year or longer to get the system running fully autonomously in every given region. It may take months of direct employee testing/training in a new region before it can be opened to the public. It may require geofencing, and an initial stint of employees in the cars. It may require constant remote monitoring, using expensive equipment and an army of employees. Therefore, it's not a one to one savings of simply removing the driver, and taking what they used to make as profit. There could be other long lasting major costs involved in removing that driver.

If you want to invest these unlisted companies, you can check out ARK Venture Fund, ARKVX. You can invest this fund directly thru Sofi app. The minimum is $500.

Not many, I still remember the days of everyone pumping the ARK funds 😂

We have a decade of evidence now that the rate of his product successes is far lower than a coin flip. When he's commenting on his vaporware, I would honestly put it closer to 90-95% of the time he's outright lying and has no real idea about whether a product or technology is possible, and certainly he has no idea when it will be ready. In fact, he most likely has a clear idea that his promised products won't be ready within the timelines he's suggesting, which IMO would make those timeline claims outright lies as well.
That said, he does increase his chances of success if he just perpetually claims the product's delivery is a year out, and gullible investors keep loading his companies with investment money.
Do you know what the success rate is for any technology if you literally can never run out of money, no matter how many times you've been proven a liar about timelines and deliverables? It's much higher than actually being taken to task with investments being pulled, which result in your company running out of money for R&D.
I mean, think about that. A lot of autonomous vehicle experts seem to agree that vision only was a bad idea. Imagine where we could be today if Tesla wasn't sucking up all of the investment capital, and that money was invested into other companies working on better approaches... More or less, Tesla's been acting as a vampire, sucking the the lifeblood (money) out of other potential innovative companies, and concentrating all eyes and efforts on their solution. Ironically, Waymo, valued at far far less than Tesla, has been progressing quicker to actually deliver real autonomous service across multiple major cities in the US, and has plans for methodical expansion.
>For example, I don’t mind FSD ends up being 20 years late, as long as Tesla ends up being the first with a million operational robotaxis.
It actually does matter how late it is. It's the difference between an OTA update suddenly launching a million robotaxis into a virgin market where Tesla is quickly handed a monopoly, wiping out all ride sharing services overnight, and being able to demand equivalent fares to those former ride sharing services, except without the cost of a driver, making the service massively profitable.
That was the promise made in April 2019. Musk got on stage and started making his ridiculous claims, one being that fully autonomous driving (FSD) would be feature complete and operational by the end of 2019, and that a million robotaxis would suddenly come online across the entire US by mid 2020; over 5.5 years ago.
The later it takes to deliver, the more likely there will already be competition or new players entering the scene shortly thereafter. In fact there already is growing competition. Waymo, Zoox, and May Mobility are already offering autonomous taxi service in multiple cities, with Waymo clearly growing the fastest of any other company (including Tesla who doesn't actually have a fully autonomous service in operation), and is already targeting some of the largest markets in the US and internationally.
Further, companies like Lucid and Mercedes want to get into the game too, with Mercedes and likely a large group of other companies looking to build out a system using the new Nvidia systems, which seems like it'll make it far easier for companies to team up, share data, and share algorithmic developments, all using a common hardware structure to rapidly develop their own services. If all those sensors Nvidia is offering in their solution are redundant and ultimately unnecessary, they can be stripped out. How about Tesla's solution, is it easier to add more sensors if needed?
The more competition, the more downward price pressure there is on autonomous taxi service and the less profitability.... for every company involved.
Tesla's been promising that autonomous taxis was, in of itself, a trillion dollar product for the company, but those claims were made with the assumption that it would be a simple matter of one day launching an OTA update and the next day there being a million Tesla taxis running completely autonomously in every part of the US, no geofencing, no further employee testing/training necessary, no remote monitoring... because all of the above cost time and money, increasing costs, slowing the rate of revenue increase, and driving down profitability.
The longer it takes Tesla, presuming they ever launch a nationwide robotaxi service outside of specifically geofenced areas... the more competition increases, and the less profitable this service is for Tesla, which makes all of the ridiculous valuations, put out by funds like ARK with their stock pumper extraordinaries like Cathie Wood, null and void.
Tesla's trial in Austin should be far more concerning than investors are letting on, because it proves that Musk's claims are false. It may take up to a year or longer to get the system running fully autonomously in every given region. It may take months of direct employee testing/training in a new region before it can be opened to the public. It may require geofencing, and an initial stint of employees in the cars. It may require constant remote monitoring, using expensive equipment and an army of employees. Therefore, it's not a one to one savings of simply removing the driver, and taking what they used to make as profit. There could be other long lasting major costs involved in removing that driver.

If you want to invest these unlisted companies, you can check out ARK Venture Fund, ARKVX. You can invest this fund directly thru Sofi app. The minimum is $500.

SCMI AT THE OPEN IM BETTING THE FARM REDEMPTION ARK BAN !!! With me brothers this is the one !!!

Been holding **$QSI (Quantum‑Si)** for a while now, and I know it’s been a rough ride, but I think there’s a **massive opportunity here that’s underappreciated by the broader market**.
* On **Cathie Wood’s “Big 13 Ideas for 2026”** 👀 ([Benzinga link](https://www.benzinga.com/trading-ideas/long-ideas/26/01/50055701/cathie-wood-has-13-big-ideas-for-2026-heres-the-ark-invest-list-and-stocks-to-watch?mod=mw_quote_news&utm_source=chatgpt.com))
* True **single-molecule protein sequencing** — biotech gamechanger 🧬
* Early-stage revenue = cheap entry 🎯
* ARK Invest thinks this could be part of the **multiomics revolution** 🚀
* Alredy selling developed products so out of RD, first in the world!!
Yes, volatile AF, yes, early days… but imagine owning the **early NGS play before the world noticed**.
*DYOR, not financial advice.*