IQ
iQIYI, Inc.
stock NASDAQ ADR

Hey man, I appreciate the dialogue and back and forth. By no means am I an expert in the area. If I'm getting something wrong, I want it to be called out so I can learn, too. That said, I'm going to go bullet by bullet with my thoughts.
Re: Margin. Absolutely, as you said, Bloom gets 25-30% margins because they manufacture proprietary tech. There is no debating that. Fluence is at 12% or so solely from their hardware. But the market is still missing that Fluence's margin expansion is actually coming from their software. I mentioned this in a previous reply - they are on track to hit $180M in ARR this year from Fluence IQ. Even if they settle as a 15% blended margin business, paying 1x forward sales for a company growing top-line revenue at 50% year-over-year is pretty insane in this market.
Re: MSAs, you are right that MSAs aren't firm purchase orders. That said, the hyperscaler MSAs are actually not in the $5.6B backlog. That $5.6B is firm, contracted utility and developer revenue. The hyperscaler deals are entirely incremental upside, and Fluence guided in their latest ER that the initial purchase orders from those orders will appear in their Q3 report.
Re: Siemens, I’d agree with you if Siemens got rid of all their shares. They sold 20 million shares but retained 41 million. As you alluded to, this was most likely Siemens AG and their trust taking a liquidity cut after holding for more than 3 years. IMO, you don't hold nearly a quarter of a company’s entire equity if you think the pipeline is broken.
Re: cash burn, they aren't bleeding cash anymore. They have $900M in liquidity and just reaffirmed $40M-$60M in positive adjusted EBITDA for this year in their ER. Because their revenue is heavily back weighted, the catalyst is really Q3 and Q4. IMO, when they print positive EBITDA and announce the first hyperscaler POs this summer, the cash-burning narrative will be done and dusted.
I always lean more bullish with my PTs, and it's not always about the company or stock itself, but rather the sector and other external factors at play. Energy is having a moment right now (Bloom being the perfect example), and while some of the float has changed hands here, it hasn't actually changed structurally. FLNC was above $32 in February at a time when I'd argue it was far less of a "sure" thing than it is right now. Again, just my thoughts.

yeah higher IQ peeps make more money than low IQ peeps

Yall brain are low IQ I would say that. 
China is not Russia first of all, China is the behemoths of manufacturing of the world, their economic is gigantic, and they are proving they can live good enough when the U.S put tariffs on them. 
China will first isolate Taiwan, then weakening Taiwan economy, they will weaken Taiwan until Taiwan economy’s collapse. 
As of now, you see the dead point of Taiwan is they are the best class in manufacturing AI chip, but China is controlling the rare earth materials which is the first in the chain for AI chip. 
China is limiting their rare earth materials exporting, that’s why the U.S visits is for that reason. 
Or U.S and China is thriving together in the next 5 years, and supply chains with limited rare earth materials delaying U.S AI infrastructure build out for next 5 years until U.S allies such Australia can produce those materials. 
Each party has their own cards, and we sit in this environment is hard for AMD to thrive and scale. 
TSMC is under pressure because of Trump see the risks, this administration applies huge tariffs on companies manufacturing chips outside of the U.S, to make them implants their technology in U.S land to secure the manufacture side for U.S to build out AI infrastructure. 
China can delay the U.S in AI building out phase as they can weakening Taiwan economy until Taiwan is weak and they will act. 

I actually learned about that from a close friend of mine who works in the industry. He's the one who turned me onto Fluence and why I started researching them more. You're 100% right that Tesla was the only game in town for a while with Autobidder. Through a bunch of M&A plays, Fluence then built out the Fluence IQ platform to try and rival it. They just shared in their last ER that they're already projecting $180M in pure ARR just from this software by the end of this year.

You're half right, but calling them just an assembler misses the entire point of their business and where it's clearly going based on the deals they've brought in with two hyperscalers. If you only look at the physical metal boxes, yes, Fluence is an integrator. They don't mine lithium, bake battery cells, build inverters, or hold the assets on their balance sheet. They buy the components, engineer the enclosures, and put the puzzle pieces together. If that were the whole story, they really would just be a low-margin hardware shop - which is what you're trying to get at.
But anyone can wire batteries together; making them work at grid scale and actually turn a profit requires massive computing power. Fluence’s real edge - and why they deserve the tech label - is the brain inside those boxes. They use their physical hardware as a Trojan horse to sell high-margin, recurring software subscriptions. Products like Fluence OS manage the complex battery health and thermal loads, while Fluence IQ uses AI to automatically bid and trade that energy on wholesale markets. They aren't just selling the battery; they are selling the software that turns the battery into a cash-printing machine.

Trading subreddit? They should not take part in any finance or economics discussion lmao, and someone do a basic IQ test of these people.

It is the genius of reddit. It has democratised discussion so you will get low IQ posts from people who didn’t even finish school with decent grades. I don’t blame you. Seeing absolutely dumb commentary has its fummy moments.

Having thought about the whole quant/academia dick masuring contest a bit more, I came to some different conclusions stemming from a few facts and want to get your impression.
1. While "software engineer" or "trader" describe work, quant tends to imply mathematically elite, financially valuable, selective, hard to replace. And honestly, it sorta is in the right contexts. The label is a proxy for IQ, rigor, compensation, and institutional prestige.
2. There are quant researchers, quant traders, quant developers, risk quants, model validators, data scientists, PMs, pricing/library quants, etc. The work varies massively. Because the boundary is unclear, people police it aggressively. Everyone is defending a definition that flatters their own comparative advantage.
3. In academia, being mathematically serious conveys status. In finance, making money conveys status. Quant finance fuses them, so people conflate "my work is mathematicallu sophisticated", "my work is economically valuable", "I am smarter than you". These are different claims bundled inside quant culture.
4. Most quants have spent their lives being "the math person". Olympiad kids, PhDs, competitive programmers, etc. When they enter quant the old identity stops differentiating them, and so starts an arms race/recursive status argument.
5. Quant work is proprietary, so nobody can actually show their real shit. Social proof substitutes for evidence. The real target is mostly invisible.
6. There's a brutal feedback loop: You can be smart and still be wrong or lucky. The job threatens the identity most quants are atached to. The macho is defensive lest you admit your intelligence failed.
7. "Quant" is aspirationally scarce. A bunch of people who don't know what they're doing diluted the label. The response from insiders is gatekeeping.
8. Status comes from multiple places: Formal sophistication or empirical edge. The two camps tend to hate each other. Theory guys think the empiricists are crude, PnL-heavy people think the theory is decorative, devs think both are useless if their work cannot run, traders think everybody overcomplicates things, researchers think traders are taking unmodeled risk. Everybody is right in a context.
If you combine the points above, I think the read is that "quant" is such a dick measuring contest because the identity is scarce and holds prestige in a field where intellect, money, secrecy, heirarchy, and uncertainty all collide. It's vague enough to fight over, valuable enough to defend, and unverifiable enough that people substitute status games for demonstrable edge.
A quant is someone who uses mathematical, statistical, computational, or systematic methods to make or improve financial decisions. The only serious follow-up questions are:
- What decision?
- What data?
- What model?
- What implementation?
- What risk?
- What evidence?
- What economic value?
Everything else is noise.

The fact that this 40 IQ post is on the sub’s front page punctuates the fact that NFTs are dead and are never coming back

Bhai dimag ko leverage ke liye girvi rakh aaya kya? Saturday ko India ki currency maket band reheti hai
And for the guy in the screenshot: bhai tu apni puri locality ki IQ negative me le ja ra hai

>First off, it takes information from the whole web
I said, in case of ChatGPT, roughly 50% comes from Reddit. Word for word. It's sitting right there in my message. You either didn't read it, or you read it, couldn't counter it, and quietly swapped it for something I never said to argue against. Classic low IQ move.
That's called a strawman btw. Or in your case, a reading comprehension issue. Hard to tell which. Either way, not a great look for someone who opened with "I don't use it the same way you do" like that was supposed to be impressive.
>Secondly, you're clearly the type to say "make me a profitable strategy that can makes me millions" and actually expect it to spit one out. I don't use it the same way you do.
So, because I told you where it pulls its data from and that it confidently lies to you, your brain immediately jumped to "this guy probably asks it for get rich quick strategies"?
I said nothing. About. Trading strategies. Not a single syllable. You built a whole strawman in your imagination, dressed it in my name, argued with it, and then lost to it. Are you having a psychiatric episode, or is this just your baseline?
The scary part isn't that you argued against something I never said. It's that you genuinely couldn't tell the difference. Whatever's happening between your ears isn't thinking. I've seen more coherent arguments from people talking to themselves on public transport. Actually no... those people at least stay on topic. And they're not half as smug about it.

Sick of losers being here. Either have money and make money by having money, or if you don't stop being a loser and make more money, or risk it all on short dated options until you do.

I'm sick of people trying to use this place to recruit for team sport mindset trades. It doesn't work and it's just low IQ garbage. Just a bunch of poor stupid kids putting their 4 figure allowance money into stupid shit thinking if enough of them do it it will matter.

Classic Ackman. Buy high, sell low, and then write a 4-page thesis on X about why it was actually a 200 IQ macro play.
Buffett is out here playing 3D chess with cash mountains while Ackman is just doing high-stakes retail trading with a billionaire skin unlocked. 💀
*“It’s not a loss, it’s a source of funds.”* Adding that to my portfolio coping dictionary immediately.

Quick Americans are asleep, bring out the high IQ discussions 

Good morning fellow high IQ and culturally rich Europeans

Mid+ IQ ppl understand context he was talking about. I value my life more than money.

Those low IQ idiots still believe the trip was successful somehow. Talk to anyone in that category and they say he struck so many deals. Look at the media that he bought and paid for and they are repeating the same news for Nvidia from January. Boeing was supposed to be a 500 plane deal and they got nothing yet his media says they got 200 and Boeing only wanted 150. They say Trump is so good he talked them up. Did you see the handshake? Xi comes in like the ruler of the world from up above and firm as Trump comes in low and submissive and looks like he’s jerking something gently.

Trump's the king of low IQ idiots. When he went to China he was way out of his league. He definitely needed more leverage but couldn't retrieve it in time.

That’s what I’m saying, why do people think this “””guy””” is our savior. I promise you that if you put in front of anyone with an over 80 IQ a sheet of paper that showed GameStops business with a Birds Eye view at the same time Cohen took over and asked them “what would you do to fix this?” they would all say “close underperforming stores, cut costs”
Like this man is not a savant bro. He has not done a single note worthy thing other than shit on a real man’s play and that man was Keith.

I'm posting here which means WSB is down to 99 IQ at the moment - so be careful, you won't get their normal careful advice.