AGI
Alamos Gold Inc. Class A Common Shares
stock NYSE

I personally feel there is not any company ever you should hold and forget for life. That’s yours to take but I study each company’s business and sector’s health every quarter and every year.
Some companies that look good (right now) are:
Caplin point, Mazdock, HDFC, BLS intl, Supriya Lifesciences, CAMS, Aptus Housing, AGI Greenpac, and few more

Yes. Now that we are retired empty nesters our tax rate is lower, so it’s not clear that the rate trade off is as favorable as it was. Also tax free doesn’t mean invisible, and muni income gets rolled back into AGI for certain things, notably eligibility for ACA subsidies.

Agree AGI talk is dumb and I believe there is reason all the technocrats have stopped talking about it (they know investors won’t bite on that line anymore)

I think they will, but I don't see "AGI" becoming a reality in this decade. The trade will need to get globalized and get better hardware built at cheaper prices, along with more hardware efficient models, preferably open source. Yes this will break the monopoly and bring the valuations of the semi, memory, photonics and frontier models.

Man all the AI data center hate is making me want to open major short positions. Home values going down nearby these data centers since they are very loud, raise electric prices and pollute the water.
They are probably more hated than flock cameras, which is amazing since most of the stonk market is propped up on capex spending by hyperscalers. Despite trillions, AI is a shit sandwich and there will never be "AGI" or whatever the new snake oil is. All those trillions wasted and no ROI, plus all the laid off workers not spending large turns into demand destruction hopefully in the next couple years we see a bottom on SPY, around 300.

This isn't a moon landing. It's not like if some country reaches a milestone then everyone stops working towards that goal. China dab reach AGI and the US can reach it later or vice versa. Eventually, everyone will have the same tech.

The market can't be right about every big tech AGI bet

We're not getting AGI with these models

The market can't be right about every big tech AGI bet

I'm very bullish on companies with scale + distribution moats. Google, Amazon, Meta, (regretfully) Microsoft. The thesis revolves around AGI becoming commoditized over the next few years.
That said, near term I actually don't think that these companies are likely to see much life at all.
The amount of money they're burning right now in the compute landgrab is eye watering and is going to impact near term earnings and FCF negatively.
The stocks have already been under pressure due to this, and I don't see it suddenly getting better this year.

Meta next. Of all the capex spenders, they are the only one that needs to be the one to achieve AGI for their investment to be worth it.
Their current AI use is nonsensical. Improving

The bull case is Zuck achieves AGI before the hardware he is spending all the cash on becomes obsolete

Anthropic is the highest revenue AI lab. They are 70% using Google TPU and Amazon Trainium.
OpenAI is using only NVIDIA and lost the AI race, had to stop SORA, and gave up the AGI project.
B300 is terrible hardware. For fp16 is slower than MI355X and costs 40% more.

>unless you think GPUs don't make money
We should check in with Oracle about their massive negative free cash flow, or Coreweave burning about a quarter of their entire revenue stream just to service interest payments on debt.
Revenue is one thing but 'making money' is another.
You need GPUs at a decent price, energy at a decent price, to host a model people want to use, and you have to do that without taking on more debt than you can service.
Not every provider is doing this and not all will survive the next five years.
>spacex has 100 billion dollars
$85.7 Billion from the IPO and $25 billion from bond sales. Although they will need to pay out on the bonds at some point. And they immediately had to use $20 billion to erase bridge loans.
$90-ish billion still sounds like to a lot out of context but they have an annualized cash burn rate of \~$70 - $85 billion.
Their continued existence depends on being able to lease out their data center capacity (because lord knows Grok isn't the mega smash hit blockbuster we all knew it wouldn't be), but there are no guarantees is that market.
There is a token price war taking place, the pace of chip production keeps growing, and Elon's now ancient 100,000 - 150,000 H100s are rapidly depreciating as they burn ever more expensive methane.
A single new rackscale system could replace 300-700 of those H100s and multiple millions of new accelerators are coming to market so I really have to wonder about the long term value of these older systems which would struggle to train newer models.
In fact xAI stopped using Colossus for training which moved to Colossus 2 (B200s - and in 3-4 years time the same thing will happen to those). That freed up Colossus original flavor.
Though they will still have to pay back the $[12 billion](https://www.datacenterdynamics.com/en/news/xai-seeks-12bn-in-debt-to-fund-colossus-2-data-center-with-first-chips-online-in-a-few-weeks/)\+ in debt it cost them.
As for actual space stuff there's $47.5 billion in pending contracts for actual space stuff coming over the next 3-7 years so that bilges the boat a little. Starlink revenue is not really worth mentioning.
> they already have the largest money printing datacenter operation outside of the hyperscalers
How do you figure? Google and Anthropic are paying sky high rates for old hardware. They aren't doing that because they want to or because they think it's a good idea or because xAI runs the best services. It's a temporary holdover due to capacity constraints. Google is on record as calling it "bridge capacity". Nobody is intending for this to be long term.
SpaceX knows this which is why they can charge high rates and why they have a 90 day termination clause.
There won't be much long term interest there which is why Elon is lobbying the Pentagon to pretty please give him [government money](https://www.reuters.com/business/media-telecom/musks-spacex-talks-provide-computing-power-pentagon-wsj-reports-2026-07-17/). I'm sure he will get it too - until the next election.
>Unless you think GPUs are worthless 
They become *worth less* with each passing year. Everything in Colossus is four years old and the B200s in Colossus 2 are now two years old.
With GPUs you really need to make back your money in the first two years. xAI, now SpaceX, has about two to three years left to recoup all their costs and pay off their debts.
Even if they do maintain long term contracts at ridiculously inflated prices it might generate $40 billion which is not nothing but it's not the trillions in untold wealth AGI is going to bring us - as per Elon's initial plans.
And let's be clear about his promises for this center.
xAI was going to create “the most powerful AI in the world” one which would “discover what the real world is like".. Now they are leasing the hardware to competitors.
>100 billion ARR that will probably go to 200+ billion next year.
Do you really think so? Why, because Elon said?
SpaceX's actual revenue for the past year (as of June 30, 2026) was $23.04 billion. Where is the other $77 billion coming from between now and Jan 1st?
They'd better get some very high margin leasing deals done but here's the thing about that, if they do it's only evidence of demand for *competing products* and in no way feeds into the long term story of SpaceX.

Since you seem old enough to remember, there was a funny story after the Soviet Union fall asking " How are they doing? The answer was. People below 20 are doing great, above 30 are struggling. Those above 40, we are waiting for them to die". In other words, for every generation it comes a moment, when their thinking and way of doing business becomes so irrelevant. If you do not see the value and the race to AGI, you lost the plot. Just another soviet above 40!

The data center point is fair, but the part that gets me is the math on what sits inside them. One gigawatt of compute costs roughly $80 billion to fill, and the AGI crowd wants 100 gigawatts. That is $8 trillion in capex, needing around $800 billion a year just to service the debt. What surprised me most is that OpenAI reportedly has no clear path to profit before 2030, minimum, and still needs another $200 billion just to keep operating.

Nobody serious thinks we will reach AGI by repeatedly prompting LLMs alone.

Except it is… now you’re apparently an expert in psychology hahaha.
Your next action is based on a prediction based on present stimulus. There is an excellent body of current research suggesting that your consciousness doesn’t direct the body how we assume, it experiences at the same time as it “directs” and makes up that it made the directions
. 
Also is we’re running on thousands of “agents” then that says nothing at all about scalability… We could eventually have LLMs with thousands of agents for every decision. That says nothing about the future capability of LLMs and whether they will be able to do that, because if that’s your measure of AGI then I would say they certainly will be able to do that eventually.

We'll have AGI before GTA6.

As with the others, saying “I know computer science” isn’t an argument. For all we know, our brains are just token predictors. We know virtually nothing about consciousness, and I see no reason here why scaling the intelligence of frontier models couldn’t get us to AGI.