ICE
Intercontinental Exchange Inc.
stock NYSE

I wouldn't be surprised if Kashkari keeps talking hikes that some more ICE agents are going to show up in near the fed in Minneapolis.

I wanted to see how well Trefis Valuations worked so I created 2 portfolios : one for Undervalued and one for Overvalued.
I started this on 7/7/26 with a hypothetical 100k portfolio each. The technical criteria for the undervalued criteria was to buy when the price crossed above the 25 day moving average. The Holdings were: MDT, SAP, CRM, CMCSA, ADBE, ISRG, ABT, META, AMZN, TM, TMUS, ICE. A couple of the holdings were sold and then rebought when they went back above the 25 day moving average.
Value for this portfolio of 8/5/26 @ 9am PT: up 6.60%
The technical criteria for the overvalued was to short if the price was below the 25 day moving average. The Holdings were: TXN, NOK, CAT, GS, MU, GLW, TSLA, SPCX, INTC, AMD, AMAT.
Value for this shorted portfolio as of 8/5/26 @ 9am PT: up 8.67%
I will update the value of each portfolio roughly every week.

Call ICE to stop this ipo asap.

If you are curious [here is the ICE futures handbook for orange juice](https://www.ice.com/publicdocs/rulebooks/futures_us/13_FCOJ.pdf).  The circuit breakers are a little different but great question.

Watch data centers start appearing in all the extra warehouses DHS purchased previously imprison ICE detainees.

I have about 14% upside left in Ferrari at the moment. Fair value range today I’d say is 380-460 so slightly weighted to the upside. Its had a huge run-up the last week into and post earnings so keep that in mind. It must be viewed from a completely different lens as you mention given operating margins 29x higher than Porsche and 25x the ROIC lol. It can’t be compared to automakers. It’s a unique asset combining luxury, incredible precise technology and engineering, and carrying the brand power of a household staple. My mom doesn’t know what a Birkin bag is but she knows what a Ferrari is. Rolex sells 80x as many watches and Hermes sells 10x as many Birkins. It will continue to be a unique asset for the foreseeable future, and their CMD last year and unveiling of the Luce provided a real opportunity in a name that effectively can manage their own growth, thrive in a K-shaped economy and has a long term structural growth story as the average age of a Ferrari buyer has shifted dramatically (under 40 from 20% 5 years ago to 40% of sales now) effectively lengthening the lifetime value of that customer as 85% of Ferrari buyers already own a vehicle. Ferrari ownership is a cult and you continue to buy to reach higher levels of access, status, etc. Those younger customers also place a heavy emphasis on customization, which can add 20-100% to the sale price at near 100% incremental margins. Revised powertrain targets for the end of the decade and what should be a better slate of classic ICE special/Icona series cars after this Luce mania set it up well to execute and exceed the end of decade targets they set out at the CMD last year, which I think was a smart move to rebound investors after explosive post COVID growth. The sell side and investors just got way too negative. I could go on for days, but I assign it a higher terminal multiple on OCF than I normally would. Really unique asset, both the company itself and the stock from the cars themselves to how centralized Ferrari runs the order book and customer access etc. capital return friendly as well. Just looking at it relative the market itself or the vast majority of large caps it won’t screen attractive on a P/E basis, especially when factoring in the growth. But there’s plenty of nuance there. Under 30x P/E and around 24-25x EV/EBITDA it was a slam dunk for me. Again, just require a different set of lens and this is a great example of the market giving you a fair price for a great business, not a great price for a fair business.
With banks I was talking more regional banks, but probably not the highest conviction example. Money centers have obviously run, but should continue to do well on the IB banking business upside from IPOs, and capital issuances. Ex-US banks are cheap, but not my cup of tea so unsure if those are “attractive”.

Palantir is often labeled "evil" by critics because its powerful data-fusing software is heavily utilized for military targeting, aggressive immigration enforcement, and domestic surveillance.Government and Military Contracts
Immigration Enforcement: Palantir built software platforms utilized by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to track, locate, and deport undocumented immigrants, sparking massive protests and internal employee dissent.
Military and Intelligence Targeting: Its Gotham platform integrates intelligence feeds and geolocation data to assist defense and intelligence agencies, with critics accusing the technology of helping optimize lethal military strikes.
Domestic Surveillance: Civil liberties groups argue that providing police and federal agencies with advanced predictive policing and data-linking tools builds the infrastructure for a digital surveillance state.
Palantir is literally building a police surveillance state to take away your personal rights.
Even their name is evil and ominous from J.R.R. Tolkien lore
The Seeing Stones: Unbreakable dark orbs used by rulers to communicate and monitor distant realms.
Symbolism: Tied to great insight, but also risk, manipulation, and downfall when corrupted by dark forces

Nah, no need for this, if you're an american citizen, you're already financing ICE through your taxes

Which ETFs are invested in ICE?

They're expanding a lot through acquisitions and diversification, and trying to move beyond being just auto ancillary company
\- Bull case: Their products are used in ICE, hybrid and EV vehicles so they're not dependent on a single tech. They're also expanding outside of auto into aerospace, defence and consumer electronics while new plants and acquisitions like Nexans should support growth over the next few yrs. And if all this contributes well then dependence on the traditional auto business should gradually reduce which will provide stable revenue and profit
\- Bear case: They still have exposure to Europe where demand is weak rn. Rising raw material costs can also temporarily lower margins before they're passed on to customers. The company has around 8,400 Cr net debt because of continuous acquisitions and running such a large global business also requires a lot of working capital which can keep return ratios under pressure in the near term. Let's see if they give any margin guidance in the Q1 this week

I would assume there are ICE agents in here scrolling like the rest of us.

is this chat being monitored by ICE?

My point is that there are very few people who view it outright *positively*, and there will likely be a growing backlash as people become more aware of its adverse effects. AI already polls less positively than ICE and the Democratic party lol

Obama definitely created the inflation Trump’s administration is seeing. It’s not wars, utility costs, oil, tariffs, bad regulation, ICE, policy, or government debt flying exponentially. Duh, trust the boomer in your life, they had $3,000 college, home costs on HLC homes for 100K. It’s your avocado toast and lack or work ethics.

ICE isn’t a commercial customer 

ICE has been busy

ICE must be very busy

We all saw the [OCC](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Options_Clearing_Corporation) memo saying the [NSCC](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Depository_Trust_%26_Clearing_Corporation#NSCC) noped out of settling GME WarrantS (GMEWS) last week \[[OP on X](https://x.com/WhatCanIMT/status/2082986376900022440), 1\] on July 30 (effective immediately); on the *last trading day* to get in a settled trade before the C35 deadline for the DTCC’s 6/29 Market Disruption \[[OP on X](https://x.com/WhatCanIMT/status/2082799115868733914)\].  Digging Deeper, **VERY BULLISH!**
When the NSCC said they’re no longer settling GME Warrants, the OCC memo said it was “Pursuant to OCC By-Law Article VI, Section 19” (blue highlight) \[2\] that GME Warrants settlement will be directly between brokers going forward.
https://preview.redd.it/h86l3l8872hh1.png?width=1996&format=png&auto=webp&s=6dc60df2465ce186bbc1964fad9fa808dd0aaf81
We can look up the Article VI, Section 19 of the OCC By-Laws \[[OCC PDF](https://www.theocc.com/getmedia/3309eceb-56cf-48fc-b3b3-498669a24572/occ_bylaws.pdf)\] and >!HOLY SHIT!< this section is *literally* titled “**Shortage of Underlying Securities**” when an event “threatens to *reduce the available supply* of the affected security to a level *insufficient to permit performance of the exercise settlement obligations* with respect to outstanding option contracts for the affected security”:
https://preview.redd.it/5qh38ud772hh1.png?width=1846&format=png&auto=webp&s=ada50b66d5bc6357a10ae45450d8957db5db70cb
**There are not enough GME Warrants so the NSCC and OCC are making brokers figure shit out between themselves when options with GME Warrants are assigned or exercised.**
https://i.redd.it/i1mrw0l572hh1.gif
Digging deeper into the OCC By-Laws to see what the OCC will do, we immediately see that the OCC says they can take 4 actions; though the 4 actions simply boils down to these 2 that we see in the OCC Memo (above under “Broker-to-Broker Settlement”):
* (1) Force brokers to settle directly between themselves (aka “figure this shit out yourselves”), and
* (2-4) Suspend & delay settlement based on the legalese in subsections (b) or (c) (red highlights)
https://preview.redd.it/30sej8c472hh1.png?width=1844&format=png&auto=webp&s=7c90d82f70b4a863e664f13f6a47836480e50664
Subsection (b) is not that interesting it's as for a situation where enough of the underlying security (i.e., GMEWS) become available.  If this happens (e.g., if GameStop issues more warrants), then use the available supply to settle.
Subsection (c) is very interesting as it’s for when “there is no reasonable likelihood that a sufficient supply of the underlying security will become available within the foreseeable future” (e.g., no more warrants from GameStop).  In this case, the OCC will “fix cash settlement prices” which means the OCC determines how much each warrant is worth and then Clearing Members pay up to settle debts.  **FU Pay Me!**
https://preview.redd.it/hkir9t7372hh1.png?width=1858&format=png&auto=webp&s=1ccae4e2b997bcaa1b11d3fdf39628b78d28fb0d
*However*, there’s a catch. The OCC decides how much each warrant debt is worth (“provided, however, that the Corporation may fix the final settlement price or adjust a previously-determined final settlement price”) *allegedly in the interest of fairness* (“as necessary or appropriate to achieve *fairness* to buyers and sellers of such futures”). *I’m pretty sure retail already knows where their thumb pushes on the scale of justice.*
At least retail does have a record of the OCC’s policy on our side, right?  Under “... *Interpretations and Policies*”, the OCC has a section with guidelines on what they’re *supposed* to do.  It’s the OCC’s policy \[.01\] to settle everything through the proper clearing corporation, but “in those situations in which the application of that policy would, in the judgment of the Corporation, be **inequitable or impractical**, the Corporation may take such actions, consistent with the By-Laws and Rules, as it deems **equitable and feasible** in the circumstances and will be guided in accordance with the provisions of Interpretation and Policy .02”.
https://preview.redd.it/jccredu072hh1.png?width=1854&format=png&auto=webp&s=56439932ab78bdb5e8b6d106a99e7f34206b47d5
Under “Interpretation and Policy .02” for when things are “inequitable or impractical”, there’s a part for “Where Shortage Appears to be Permanent” which says the OCC will “fix cash settlement prices to be paid in settlement”.
https://preview.redd.it/0xzkv8u172hh1.png?width=1854&format=png&auto=webp&s=3e160d523018dbe0deaa973ba0cca62ad22dd0db
There is also a policy section for “Fixing of Cash Settlement Prices” which *generally* says to use the market value (where available). *So far so good…*
https://preview.redd.it/3k2cpotw62hh1.png?width=3044&format=png&auto=webp&s=ad653adb3fa498865b533a6f6410c92a9e8b187a
Until we get to the policy section for “Determination of Market Value of Underlying Security” where if the OCC determines there are *special circumstances* (e.g., MOASS) that would make the policies “unfair to exercising Clearing Members or assigned Clearing Members \[the OCC\] may use a different method to determine the market price of the underlying security”.
https://preview.redd.it/n25y95kv62hh1.png?width=1796&format=png&auto=webp&s=9316a172cdd7a94777859fa3e9b2dba50405b8b0
*🤦 The OCC can do whatever they want if it’s unfair to Clearing Members.*
Lastly, there’s also a section for “Situations Not Otherwise Provided For” (MOASS might fit that description) where the OCC decides what the *equitable* final \[cash\] settlement prices will be fixed at. 
https://preview.redd.it/f3zsznmt62hh1.png?width=1796&format=png&auto=webp&s=77956bc642d6aeef3e5c90b4edc981bdabe5db88
With all this OCC Policy about doing what’s *equitable* \[[LII](https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/equitable), [Dictionary](https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/equitable)\]*,* *fair, feasible and practical*, keep in mind that the [OCC’s Board of Directors](https://www.theocc.com/company-information/board-of-directors) is filled with people connected to [Bank of America](https://www.theocc.com/company-information/board-of-directors/stuart-bourne), [UBS](https://www.theocc.com/company-information/board-of-directors/maria-chiodi), [Goldman Sachs](https://www.theocc.com/company-information/board-of-directors/alicia-crighton), [Nasdaq](https://www.theocc.com/company-information/board-of-directors/jeffery-davis) ([\#2](https://www.theocc.com/company-information/board-of-directors/kevin-kennedy)), [Apex Clearing](https://www.theocc.com/company-information/board-of-directors/matthew-hulsizer), [Intercontinental Exchange (ICE)](https://www.theocc.com/company-information/board-of-directors/elizabeth-k-king), [JP Morgan](https://www.theocc.com/company-information/board-of-directors/michael-kurd), [Jeffries](https://www.theocc.com/company-information/board-of-directors/joseph-lewis), [CBOE](https://www.theocc.com/company-information/board-of-directors/tim-lipscomb), [Schwab](https://www.theocc.com/company-information/board-of-directors/faris-matalka), [NYSE](https://www.theocc.com/company-information/board-of-directors/mike-west), and [**Citadel**](https://www.theocc.com/company-information/board-of-directors/josh-woods). 👎⚖️ 
At least the OCC Policy says the starting point for how much we’ll get paid is based on the market value of the GME Warrants.
# OCC Now Picking Winners and Losers
Now that the OCC has forced all the brokers to settle exercised options between themselves, this means that exercising Clearing Members have to **settle directly with the** ***assigned*** **Clearing Member** (see Shortage of Underlying Securities above, red underline) possibly requiring a buy-in; *with OCC handling the assignment*.  
The OCC picks who is assigned to deliver GMEWS on a GME1 option assignment/exercise.  
https://preview.redd.it/g5cdeg5s62hh1.png?width=777&format=png&auto=webp&s=19d51a7d2aff7acd380c3abbdaf3bc13c7bef57e
The OCC picks the **loser** for every GME1 options assignment/exercise.  So unlike Squid Game players who choose their own order for crossing the glass bridge, the **OCC \[3\] controls** who goes next in line and, thus, who is most likely to fall first and who is most likely to make it across. \[4\]
# BUT "The Loser" DOES NOT DEFAULT
Oddly, the loser here **does not default** despite failing to deliver on contractual obligations.  Thanks to a 2006 Proposed Rule Change by the OCC (approved May 2007, just a bit before the 2008-2009 Great Financial Crisis \[5\]) \[[Federal Register](https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2007/07/20/E7-14019/self-regulatory-organizations-the-options-clearing-corporation-order-granting-approval-of-a-proposed)\] actions by the OCC under Section 19 of Article VI (including suspending settlement obligations) in the event of a Shortage Of Underlying Securities “**would not be considered an event of default** \[and\] would not allow a Clearing Member to initiate the close-out netting procedures” \[[Id.](https://www.federalregister.gov/d/E7-14019/p-36)\].
https://preview.redd.it/crqquqtq62hh1.png?width=1514&format=png&auto=webp&s=a88522e1058f5459a8cb3bb77d0559380cad1e44
Squid Game (and its dire consequences) is only for the poors.
**Footnotes**
\[1\] See also: [SuperStonk](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/1vbbmks/found_on_x_gamestop_corporation_brokertobroker/) and [1st known X post by RuoKdam](https://x.com/RuoKdaM/status/2082979574371999897). And [OCC Memo PDF](https://infomemo.theocc.com/infomemos?number=59491).
\[2\] Credit to [this post by DirtEvader on X](https://x.com/dirtevader/status/2083106560025169994).
\[3\] Please note the the [OCC’s Board of Directors](https://www.theocc.com/company-information/board-of-directors) is filled with people connected to [Bank of America](https://www.theocc.com/company-information/board-of-directors/stuart-bourne), [UBS](https://www.theocc.com/company-information/board-of-directors/maria-chiodi), [Goldman Sachs](https://www.theocc.com/company-information/board-of-directors/alicia-crighton), [Nasdaq](https://www.theocc.com/company-information/board-of-directors/jeffery-davis) ([\#2](https://www.theocc.com/company-information/board-of-directors/kevin-kennedy)), [Apex Clearing](https://www.theocc.com/company-information/board-of-directors/matthew-hulsizer), [Intercontinental Exchange (ICE)](https://www.theocc.com/company-information/board-of-directors/elizabeth-k-king), [JP Morgan](https://www.theocc.com/company-information/board-of-directors/michael-kurd), [Jeffries](https://www.theocc.com/company-information/board-of-directors/joseph-lewis), [CBOE](https://www.theocc.com/company-information/board-of-directors/tim-lipscomb), [Schwab](https://www.theocc.com/company-information/board-of-directors/faris-matalka), [NYSE](https://www.theocc.com/company-information/board-of-directors/mike-west), and [**Citadel**](https://www.theocc.com/company-information/board-of-directors/josh-woods).
\[1\] See also: [SuperStonk](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/1vbbmks/found_on_x_gamestop_corporation_brokertobroker/), [1st known X post by RuoKdam](https://x.com/RuoKdaM/status/2082979574371999897), and [OCC Memo PDF](https://infomemo.theocc.com/infomemos?number=59491).
\[2\] Credit to [this post by DirtEvader on X](https://x.com/dirtevader/status/2083106560025169994).
\[3\] Please note the the[ OCC’s Board of Directors](https://www.theocc.com/company-information/board-of-directors) is filled with people connected to[ Bank of America](https://www.theocc.com/company-information/board-of-directors/stuart-bourne),[ UBS](https://www.theocc.com/company-information/board-of-directors/maria-chiodi),[ Goldman Sachs](https://www.theocc.com/company-information/board-of-directors/alicia-crighton),[ Nasdaq](https://www.theocc.com/company-information/board-of-directors/jeffery-davis) ([\#2](https://www.theocc.com/company-information/board-of-directors/kevin-kennedy)),[ Apex Clearing](https://www.theocc.com/company-information/board-of-directors/matthew-hulsizer),[ Intercontinental Exchange (ICE)](https://www.theocc.com/company-information/board-of-directors/elizabeth-k-king),[ JP Morgan](https://www.theocc.com/company-information/board-of-directors/michael-kurd),[ Jeffries](https://www.theocc.com/company-information/board-of-directors/joseph-lewis),[ CBOE](https://www.theocc.com/company-information/board-of-directors/tim-lipscomb),[ Schwab](https://www.theocc.com/company-information/board-of-directors/faris-matalka),[ NYSE](https://www.theocc.com/company-information/board-of-directors/mike-west), and[ **Citadel**](https://www.theocc.com/company-information/board-of-directors/josh-woods).
\[4\] Remember when the OCC proposed a rule change to reduce margin requirements for Clearing Members at risk of failure to prevent a cascade of Clearing Member failures \[[SuperStonk](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/1ae0toi/occ_proposes_reducing_margin_requirements_to/)\]; which apes shot down \[[SuperStonk](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/1ciqum4/simians_smash_sec_rule_proposal_to_reduce_margin/)\]?  That proposal included a seemingly innocuous and boring Financial Risk Manager (FRM) position whose entire job was to basically rubber stamp margin reductions for Clearing Members \[[Id.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/1ciqum4/simians_smash_sec_rule_proposal_to_reduce_margin/)\]; until there’s someone the OCC wants to margin call and <Soup Naz!> *no rubber stamp for you*! </<Soup Naz!>  *The power to selectively put out a sacrificial lamb and/or scapegoat.*  (Credit to Dismal Jellyfish for originally noticing this. 💜🫡)
Despite apes shooting down that ridiculous proposal, the OCC has found a way using existing frameworks to *selectively put out a sacrificial lamb / scapegoat* by controlling who is assigned on options exercises and their contractual requirements to deliver.  
\[5\] Very convenient timing for this Rule Proposal and Approval just before the 2008-2009 Great Financial Crisis when you consider that it literally says "an OCC default or insolvency has always been considered so unlikely that OCC's rules do not contain any provisions whatever contemplating such events" \[[Federal Register](https://www.federalregister.gov/d/E7-14019/p-9)\].  There was so much shit hitting the fan in 2008 that the OCC was forced to consider the risk it would go under.  And now we're seeing the same rules and By-Laws coming up. 🤔

Wenn dann aber richtig ausnutzen. Ein Kumpel hatte sich die 100 damals in ähnlicher Situation geholt. Er hat gerne davon geschwärmt wie cool es ist, sich morgens einfach ohne Vorbereitung in den ICE nach Berlin zu setzen, auf der Fahrt zu lernen, einen halben Tag in Berlin zu machen und danach wieder zurück.

Mannheim - Osnabrück schaffst du im durchgehenden ICE ohne Umstieg in 3:45 h (Stundentakt), die zeitlich kürzeste Verbindung im Regionalverkehr dauert unter Optimalbedingungen 6:26 h und enthält drei Umstiege.