Serenity @aleabitoreddit 56m There you have it, $GOOGL Waymo to explore split with $UBER per FT. My view last year wa...
Waymo–Uber split / renegotiation increases strategic optionality for Google and raises platform-control risk for Uber; alternative partner narrative could lift NBIS.
Linked assets
These are the assets attached to this thesis, along with direction, confidence, and outcome so far.
Alphabet Inc.
Post frames Uber as distribution Google needs while scaling; a split implies Google can go direct and/or strengthen terms.
UBER is the equity of Uber Technologies, Inc., a Technology-sector company in the Software - Application industry.
Author argues Uber won’t partner with Waymo everywhere because it could ultimately shift users into Waymo app, implying strategic conflict and partnership fragility.
Nebius Group N.V., a technology company, engages in building full-stack infrastructure to service the global AI industry in the Netherlands, Europe, North America, and Israel.
Named as an alternative ‘neutral’ autonomy partner (Avride) that Uber partially owns; would be relatively more aligned than Waymo per author.
Source proof
Source proof: Strong source proof | 2 extracted claims | 3 directional assets | 1 supporting author | headline-like title review
Post reacts to FT report that $GOOGL Waymo may explore a split with $UBER. Author argues Uber partnering with Waymo was a bad choice because Uber becomes a distribution funnel that benefits Google as Waymo scales; expects Uber would not partner with Waymo in all cities and suggests Uber would prefer partnering with another FSD-4 player like $NBIS “Avride” that Uber partially owns and that doesn’t have a standalone competitor app.
Post highlights Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang joining X to share a letter arguing “open models matter,” with claims that AI will transform every industry and that open models improve safety/cybersecurity, accelerate innovation/diffusion, and enable national “sovereignty.” This is primarily narrative/positioning; no concrete earnings/product/supply-chain catalyst is stated.
Post discusses co-packaged optics (CPO) vs pluggable optics timeline. Says $AAOI is working on CPO but is "further behind in commercialization". Cites a podcast featuring the $SIVE CEO; key takeaway quoted: "Pluggables will be around for the next 10" (interpretable as ~10 years), implying slower CPO displacement and reduced near-term disruption for pluggable-focused vendors.
Post cites informal channel checks that AMD’s Helios scale-up networking roadmap may adopt co-packaged optics (CPO) in future generations, and that broader hyperscaler/industry adoption of CPO is expected. This is a forward-looking packaging/interconnect thesis that could be bullish for AMD’s AI networking competitiveness and for public optics/photonics suppliers, but lacks specifics (names, timing, sourcing), reducing near-term tradability.
Social post thanking a Belgian newspaper (De Tijd) for covering the author’s supply chain thesis in CPO (co-packaged optics) + photonics, and mentioning tickers AAOI, XFAB, and MRVL. No new fundamental datapoints or catalyst details provided beyond media coverage/awareness.
User complains about spam/bots on X and hopes the platform improves moderation. No concrete market-moving info or catalysts provided.
Post argues HPS.A (Hammond Power Solutions) is nearing a 2-month technical timeframe level and remains a compelling “compounder” due to strong transformer-demand visibility, solid backlog, and high market share in dry-type transformers. Mentions “Transformers in the Sky” up 83.3% (unclear reference/benchmark).
Analysis reset: X provider unavailable during stale source-analysis outage; event preserved without source analysis.
Supporting authors
Unlock full thesis monitoring
Create an account to track this ticker thesis across linked assets, alerts, Telegram workflows, and deeper source analysis.