SMCI
Super Micro Computer, Inc. Common Stock
stock NASDAQ

Yesterday I got downvoted for saying balls deep in SMCI, now I'm balls deeper

Before the spike, I BTC 2x SMCI 6/18 34-35 call spreads for .11 each (+100 gain before fees on those). Now I've just got the 6/18 33p which is looking considerably less dire than this morning

**SATS is a $32B market cap holding company with $35B in SpaceX equity, $20B in cash arriving in the coming weeks, and 25% of the float short.**
SATS is currently:
·       \~260 million post-split SpaceX shares representing \~2% of SPCX. At $135 IPO price that's **$35 billion gross.**
·       Poised to receive $20.25B cash payment from AT&T arriving in the coming weeks. Its $24.56B total debt **mostly gets wiped out** when that cash arrives.
·       Set to have a clean balance sheet and essentially act as a holding company, sitting on a publicly traded SpaceX stake worth more than the entire current market cap.
·       Represented on the S&P500 as of March 23, 2026, creating a floor to its price via passive buying.
The market cap of the stock today is \~$32B. Again, the SpaceX stake alone is worth $35B.
**WHY IS IT SO CHEAP / VOLATILE**:
1.     **The debt looks unattractive.** EchoStar skipped a $183M interest payment June 1. However, management said that they're holding cash while they wait for the AT&T $20B to close. It's a treasury management decision not a bankruptcy filing. The grace period expires July 1. AT&T is set to close before then.
2.     **The options market is running the stock.** 25.64% short interest. 7.68 days to cover. Call/put ratio 4.8:1. Market makers are delta hedging constantly which creates 4-6% swings on little to no news. The volatility you're seeing is mechanical, not fundamental.
3.     **Nobody knows what to do with it taxonomically.** DCF analysts say it's worth $20 (I believe they're ignoring the SpaceX stake entirely). SOTP analysts say $155-161 (TD Cowen, New Street Research). The spread between bull and bear price targets is $141.
**THE SETUP GOING INTO THE IPO:**
SpaceX starts trading June 12 at $135. Books closed 2x oversubscribed at $150B of demand. Multiple $10B+ institutional orders. 30% retail allocation. Fixed price IPO.
**SATS is currently pricing SpaceX at approximately $155-165 based on NAV math.** Private grey market was trading SPCX at $145-160 pre-IPO. If SPCX opens at $155+, the implied SATS NAV is $120-135. If it opens at $175+, squeeze conditions are perfect.
**THE SHORT SQUEEZE MATH**
25.64% of float short. 7.68 days to cover. S&P 500 inclusion March 2026 means passive funds are buying every single day. Darsana Capital, Carl Icahn, and DLD Asset Management (with a $2.5B position) are all long.
Jackson Peak Capital recently wrote in their Q1 investor letter that their SATS position hurt returns due to "trading activity around the underlying" but they're still holding into the IPO because the NAV discount is too large to ignore. When smart money gets punched in the face and stays in the trade, pay attention.
The squeeze doesn't need retail. It just needs shorts to start covering when the AT&T close removes the last bear catalyst. 7.68 days to cover means if even 20% of shorts decide to exit simultaneously the move is violent.
**HIDDEN, ADDED VALUE:**
After AT&T closes and SpaceX is public, SATS still has remaining spectrum licenses. Morningstar has a fair value model suggesting Verizon and T-Mobile will eventually need to buy this spectrum. The market is assigning approximately $0 to this optionality right now. It's a free call option on future spectrum auctions sitting on top of the SpaceX stake.
**RISKS:**
·       AT&T close delayed by tower company litigation or FCC order finality challenge → grace period triggers formal default → SMCI scenario. This is the only thing that kills the trade and probability is \~20%.
·       SpaceX opens at $135 and fades toward Morningstar's $780B fair value bear case → SATS re-rates to $87-100 → Jan calls worthless.
·       Hedge fund may mechanically trim, which may create a ceiling at $125-130.
·       There may be a "sell the news" proxy selloff. Yahoo dropped 2.7% when Alibaba popped 38% on IPO day. BUT - Yahoo had a dying core business and was selling shares at the IPO. SATS is selling nothing IPO day because its shares are locked up.
 

**SMCI DD:**
**Position**
Long SMCI.
Not financial advice.
I made hundreds of thousands on position then got nuked in 7 days
Gpt 5.5 analysis confirming my thesis citing Charles keynote at computex
tl:dr gross fucking margins
# The Market Thinks SMCI Does This
1. Buy Nvidia GPUs.
2. Screw them into a box.
3. Ship box.
4. Collect tiny margin.
5. Get commoditized.
Honestly, that's been a pretty reasonable bear case.
But after digging through the Computex keynote, I think the market is looking at the wrong damn business.
The question isn't:
>"How many servers does SMCI sell?"
The question is:
>"Is SMCI becoming the company that actually builds AI factories?"
Because those are very different valuations.
# The Computex Stuff Nobody Paid Attention To
Everyone got hung up on:
>"We shipped more than 8,000 racks."
Cool.
Maybe they're GB300 racks.
Maybe HGX racks.
Maybe a mix.
I don't actually care.
What caught my attention was Charles Liang spending basically the entire keynote talking about:
* Liquid cooling
* Rack integration
* Power infrastructure
* Deployment
* Networking
* Software
* Services
The guy barely talked about servers.
Instead he kept repeating:
>"Time to online."
Translation:
>"We help customers start printing money faster."
That's a much better business than assembling boxes.
# The Quote That Made Me Stop
Not the 8,000 racks.
Not Rubin.
This:
>"This year can be 40 billion and next year much more than 40 billion."
Excuse me?
Much more than $40B?
Most investors completely ignored this.
The CEO is basically standing on stage saying:
>"You guys still don't understand how big this wave is."
# Here's The Entire Investment Thesis
Everything comes down to one number:
# GROSS MARGIN
Not revenue.
Not rack count.
Not backlog.
Gross margin.
If SMCI is just Nvidia's assembly bitch:
* 10% margins
* Bears win
* End of story
If SMCI is capturing money from:
* Cooling
* Integration
* Deployment
* Software
* Services
Then margins go up.
And suddenly the market realizes this isn't just a server company.
My cheat sheet:
10-11% GM
→ You're cooked.
12-13% GM
→ Interesting.
14-15% GM
→ Uh oh, bears.
16%+ GM
→ Absolute face-ripping rerating.
# Then Today's Nuclear Bomb Dropped
SMCI announced:
# $7 BILLION financing
Stock immediately got sent to the shadow realm.
Everyone screamed:
>DILUTION!!!
Which is fair.
But almost nobody read the second part.
Management disclosed:
# $39 BILLION OF AI SERVER ORDERS
Read that again.
Thirty.
Nine.
Billion.
Dollars.
And the reason they're raising money is because they need to buy enough shit to fulfill those orders.
Suddenly:
* The 6 million square feet of manufacturing makes sense.
* The deployment obsession makes sense.
* The $40B+ revenue comments make sense.
# Why I Think The Market Freaked Out
The market heard:
>"SMCI needs money."
I heard:
>"Demand is bigger than the balance sheet."
Those are completely different statements.
A dying company raises money because nobody wants their products.
A company in the middle of an AI gold rush raises money because everybody wants their products.
The question isn't demand anymore.
Demand just punched everyone in the face.
The question is:
>"How much money does SMCI make on that demand?"
And we're right back to gross margins.
Again.
Gross margins.
Every. Single. Time.
# Final Take
The market spent today asking:
>"How much dilution are we getting?"
I think the better question is:
>"Why the hell would management raise $7B right after telling us they have $39B of fresh orders?"
Either:
1. They're idiots.
or
1. They're staring at an AI infrastructure buildout that's bigger than their balance sheet.
Next earnings decides who's right.
Not revenue.
Not rack counts.
Not Rubin.
# Gross. Fucking. Margins.
#

Built an autonomous paper trading system on a Jetson Orin Nano. Been running it for 59 days. Real money goes in June 13. Here's the honest data before I flip the switch:
Strategy: 9/21 EMA crossover + ATR-based stops + RVOL confirming filter + breakeven lock at +5%
Results (20 trades, 14 closed):
\- Win rate: 33.3%
\- Avg winner: +$999
\- Avg loser: -$316
\- Total closed P&L: +$1,470
\- Two trades (ARM +$2,048, AMD +$1,741) are carrying the whole system
What I changed before going live:
1. Replaced fixed 2% trailing stop with ATR-based stops, the fixed stop was getting shaken out of good trades by normal daily volatility. NVDA needed 11% of room, not 2%.
2. Added RVOL confirming filter, only enter if yesterday's volume was above 80% of 10-day average. Filters out low-conviction signals.
3. Breakeven lock, once up 5%, stop moves to entry. The position becomes risk-free.
4. Backtested all closed trades against a gap% filter I was considering, it would have blocked ARM. Killed the idea.
5. Fixed a position sizing bug, MAX\_RISK\_PER\_TRADE was 0.10 (10% of $102K paper account per trade). Changed to 0.02. Had a $10K notional position in SMCI that I didn't intend.
The honest concern going live:
The system is profitable because of two outlier trades. Without ARM and AMD the system is net negative. That's the reality of momentum trading, you need your winners to be much bigger than your losers. 33% win rate with 3:1 win/loss ratio is mathematically positive expectancy but requires discipline to stick with through losing streaks.
Also running 5 paper strategies simultaneously, for comparison: 20/50 EMA, mean reversion (RSI<35 + Z-score<-1.5), VIX-filtered version, and two crypto strategies. 90 days of parallel data before any of those get real money.

Had puts in the morning I sold for a loss then bought a bunch of SMCI puts and sold them as they kept going up

SMCI dropped 28% today

# Overall Market Short Exposure (as of early-mid 2026)
* **Total U.S. active short interest** has risen notably in 2026, increasing by \~$81 billion year-to-date in one reported snapshot (from $2.42T to $2.50T). Domestic short exposure rose \~4.3% or $90B in a similar period.
* Regulatory reported short interest sits around $1.55T (primarily in actively traded portfolios).
* Bearish positioning reached all-time highs in some metrics (e.g., total bearish positions across US/Canada nearing $2.13T at points), with median short interest elevated across S&P 500 stocks.
* Despite the rise in shorts, active longs have grown even more (e.g., +$271B in one period), meaning net positioning isn't uniformly bearish. Shorts are often used for hedging or targeted bets rather than outright market direction.
# Key Sectors and Themes
This highlights concentrated shorting in areas vulnerable to disruption, high valuations, or macro risks:
* **Information Technology / Software**: Persistent focus, with shorts targeting non-AI or legacy software amid AI disruption.
* **Consumer Discretionary, Healthcare, Financials**: Significant short exposure (e.g., Financials historically in the $141B+ range in older recaps).
* **EV / Auto (e.g., LCID, NIO), Semiconductors (selective, like large-cap shorts on NVDA as the #1 single-name short in S&P at points with $62.5B notional)**, and cyclicals.
* **Battleground Stocks**: Names with heavy long *and* short interest (e.g., SMCI, space stocks like LUNR/SPCE, certain AI-adjacent). These show volatile positioning battles.
Shorts have faced challenges: Most-shorted stocks often outperformed in rallies (strongest six-month outperformance since 2021 in 2025 data, with similar dynamics into 2026), driven by short covering and crowding
# Notable Individual Stocks (Recent Highlights)
* **CHTR (Charter Communications)**: As of Feb 2026, the most shorted in S&P 500 at \~20.4% of float. High debt ($95B vs. \~$35B market cap) and limited float liquidity make it a squeeze candidate (squeeze score hit 100 after rallies). Battleground status with L/S ratio \~0.8.
* **SMCI (Super Micro Computer)**: Significant short bias in large-cap analysis.
* **TTD (Trade Desk)**: Short interest surged \~50% in March 2026 on ad spending/competition fears, triggering first squeeze risk in a year.
* **Space-related (LUNR, SPCE)**: High volatility around SpaceX news; shorts got stuck or squeezed as prices rallied (e.g., LUNR notional doubled to $950M despite some covering).
* **Others frequently mentioned**: High shorts in UiPath (29% float at points), EVs, certain semis (QCOM swings), and names like WULF/CIFR (crypto miners with very high % float shorts from prior context).

Here are today's top pre-market performers showing the biggest moves before regular trading hours.
## 📈 Pre-Market Gainers:
| Symbol | Company | Pre-Market | Regular Hours | Change | %Change |
|:-------|:--------|:----------:|:-------------:|:------:|:-------:|
| [BBDO](https://marketrodeo.com/asset/BBDO) | Banco Bradesco S.A. | 3.30 | 2.91 | +0.39 | +13.40% |
| [SREA](https://marketrodeo.com/asset/SREA) | Sempra | 23.10 | 20.98 | +2.12 | +10.10% |
| [YPF](https://marketrodeo.com/asset/YPF) | YPF Sociedad Anónima | 57.57 | 53.61 | +3.96 | +7.38% |
| [ACWI](https://marketrodeo.com/asset/ACWI) | iShares MSCI ACWI ETF | 162.92 | 154.60 | +8.32 | +5.38% |
| [GFL](https://marketrodeo.com/asset/GFL) | GFL Environmental Inc. | 37.51 | 35.71 | +1.80 | +5.04% |
## 📉 Pre-Market Losers:
| Symbol | Company | Pre-Market | Regular Hours | Change | %Change |
|:-------|:--------|:----------:|:-------------:|:------:|:-------:|
| [SMCI](https://marketrodeo.com/asset/SMCI) | Super Micro Computer, Inc. | 35.80 | 40.64 | -4.84 | -11.91% |
| [SOXL](https://marketrodeo.com/asset/SOXL) | Direxion Daily Semiconductor Bull 3X ETF | 183.50 | 201.68 | -18.18 | -9.01% |
| [SAIA](https://marketrodeo.com/asset/SAIA) | Saia, Inc. | 441.06 | 479.30 | -38.24 | -7.98% |
| [UMC](https://marketrodeo.com/asset/UMC) | United Microelectronics Corporation | 18.34 | 19.88 | -1.54 | -7.76% |
| [SMMT](https://marketrodeo.com/asset/SMMT) | Summit Therapeutics Inc. | 13.25 | 14.29 | -1.04 | -7.28% |
Source: [Market Extended Hours](https://marketrodeo.com/market-extended-hours)

Everyone is chasing NVDA, SMCI, or the utility/nuclear stocks for power. But I wanted to find the deeper suppliers—specifically, companies that are classified as legacy industrial businesses but are actually quite hard to bypass for the next phase of AI scaling.
I think Richardson Electronics ($RELL) fits this bill. Here is why the thesis looks interesting.
1. The Power Quality Bottleneck
AI clusters consume an absurd amount of power, but it’s also about power quality. Next-gen architectures (like Nvidia’s GB200) are pushing rack power density toward 130kW–190kW+. These loads require a shift to high-voltage central busbars and DC power distribution to prevent voltage sags and hardware damage.
RELL has been a high-voltage, high-frequency power management specialist for over 70 years. The market largely ignores them because their legacy revenue came from old industrial heating, vacuum tubes, and radar. However, the exact same engineering expertise required for those legacy systems is what’s needed to deliver stable, high-voltage power conversion to modern AI data center racks.
2. The Silicon Transition
They are actively expanding. In mid-May, RELL announced a global strategic partnership with NIS Power to expand their Silicon Carbide (SiC) power semiconductor product line. SiC is key for handling high-voltage, high-efficiency power conversion in next-gen data infrastructure.
3. The Numbers
Unlike most AI or semiconductor names trading at crazy multiples, RELL looks reasonably valued because it's still buried in the old industrial category.
\- Market Cap: It's a small-cap company, currently valued around $255M.
\- The Backlog: In their latest Q3 call, management noted their backlog rose 11.4% to $151M (a 3-year high), driven explicitly by their power management and semiconductor equipment segments.
\- Valuation: If you take the $255M market cap and subtract their \~$30M in cash, the enterprise value is around $225M. This puts their EV/Backlog ratio at just 1.49x.
\- Balance Sheet: They have virtually zero debt, \~$30M in cash, and over $100M in inventory, trading at a P/B ratio around 1.67x.
To me, it looks like a dusty 70-year-old manufacturer that is quietly positioning itself as a critical power-quality provider for the semiconductor space, while trading at a deep value valuation.
Would love to hear your thoughts. Is anyone else tracking the high-voltage power angle for data centers, or has anyone looked into RELL's specific supply chain relationships?

SMCI is known for shady accounting and despite almost getting delisted for not filing 10-k last year, has said they won’t change any accounting practices.
Then, 3 executives were arrested for smuggling Nvidia chips.
Today, they copied the Google playbook and diluted shares, using AI as an excuse. Somehow, bulls will still find this scam company doing what Google is doing as bullish