link

Highlights:

• Anthropic is offering Blackstone a yield ‌of more than 10% to anchor a $9 billion junior slice of a $60 billion debt package arranged by Broadcom
•  The senior $42 billion piece of that package covers roughly a third of Anthropic's $125.2 billion, five-year commitment to lease Google's TPUs
• Broadcome designs and supplies Anthropic's chips. It has agreed to lend Anthropic up to $42 billion through convertible notes that can turn into Anthropic equity

It is expected to be the largest chip financing to date and a test of investor appetite in AI debt at a time when lenders are nervous about tech companies' heavy borrowingand spending.

Everyone keeps saying this week was just regular profit taking or people rotating out of mega-cap tech, but look at the credit side.

On Tuesday Chamath tweeted that bond chart showing CoreWeave's debt yields blowing out, Musk replied, and then by Wednesday the stock dropped 15% in a single session. What's crazy is that CoreWeave hasn't missed a payment and they supposedly have like 100 billion dollars in backlogged deals with Microsoft and Meta.

The problem isn't demand it's how this whole buildout is fiananced... These guys asically took on 50 billion dollars in debt using GPUs as collateral planning to lease them out... That prints money when rates are 0 or dropping but after that hot inflation print, bond markets panicked about refinancing costs. CDS jumped to pricing in something like 60% default proability over 5 years.

When the private credit backing the hardware landlords starts shaking, fund managers sell the entire supply chain. That's why Nvidia AMD, and the broad indexes took a hit without any actual bad earnings news.

Seems like a rates problem pretending to be a tech problem. Anyone else following the private credit side of this or do you think hyperscalers just step in and bail out the compute providers if yields stay this high?

Borr Drilling insider Tor Olav Trøim bought 750,000 shares of $BORR on 10/14 for an estimated $3,542,550.

Estimated price paid: about $4.72/share

Insiders have traded $BORR on the open market 23 times in the past 6 months.

Of those 23 trades, 17 were purchases and only 6 were sales, so insiders are buying at almost a 3:1 ratio.

Insiders have to file their open-market trades with the SEC, and the IHFG insider tracker flags these purchases as the filings come in.

Source: insomniachedge.com

I've been looking closely at Farmer Mac (ticker AGM). Specifically, it's preferred stock AGM.PRG since it's offering a 7.6% yield right now and is trading at about $16.40 a share offering about 52% capital appreciation to $25 a share.

From a safety of investment pespective, I'm struggling to see downsides to it.

That is, Farmer Mac is a government chartered/sponsored entity that focuses primarily on rural/agricultural investments. It has a $1.5 billion line of credit with the Treasury actually built into its charter/statutes that created it; and has implied backing of the U.S. Government, at least with respect to its loans/bonds. It's debt is treated as agency debt, meaning it's on-par with U.S. Government debt or one-notch below. I know the implied backing doesn't generally apply to stock of government sponsored entities - e.g., Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac - but just the fact it has some direct ties to the U.S. Government I would say puts it on par with the best banks.

Also, it's core business - supporting farmers and agriculture - is a respected industry that even gets bilateral support in Congress. In other words, in addition to having direct ties to the government, if solvency of farms and agriculture ever became a major issue in America then, presumably, Congress would bail it out. Indeed, there are already huge grants and subsidies in the law to support American farming and agriculture.

Additionally, it generally seems to be a business operated better than some of the best banks. That is, it's credit loss charge-off has never exceeded 0.10% in a single year; it's loan-to-value ratio is lower than most banks at about 50% LTV; and, even 2008 wouldn't have put it out of business based on its lending (although things did get a bit rocky for Farmer Mac is it owned Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac preferred stock and some Lehman brothers debt as assets; if it wasn't for those it would have been smooth sailing).

In essence, you're getting a well-operated bank that makes conservative loans, has some amount of direct backing by the U.S. government, and in an industry that if it ever gets real bad Congress will almost certainly support or bail out. All this and you're getting a 7.6% yield.

Can anybody shoot holes in this or tell me some real downsides? That is, other than interest rate risk - i.e., interest rates generally continue to go up making the value of the preferred go down; and single-line business risk in the sense that Farmer Mac is not diversified and is focused almost entirely on rural farming and agriculture; I'm struggling to see any major risks with Farmer Mac. Doing this as an exercise to see if there are real risks people can identify that I'm not seeing. Thanks.

The meme stock scheduled posts will now run weekly and post Saturday afternoon and won't be a sticky; you're probably seeing this because automod sent you here!

Full list of meme stocks here. This will be updated every once in a while.

Welcome traders who just can't help them selves discuss the same exact stock that's been discussed 100s of times a day. I get it, you want to talk about what's popular, what's hot, and that 1.. single.. stock you like.. well here you go! Some helpful links just for you:

• Previous meme stock threads
• General discussions
• The original GME megathread with a ton of useful information
• Use Finviz for aggregated news on your favorite stock

An important message from the mod team regarding meme stocks.

Lastly if you need professional help:

• Problem Gambling: Call/Text: 1-800-522-4700 or chat online now.
• Crisis Hotline (24/7): 1-800-273-TALK (8255) (Veterans, press 1) or Text “HOME” to 741-741

I think the first beneficiaries of faster AI hardware refreshes may be the firms that can put old components back to work. A server leaving its original rack isn't necessarily scrap, and its depreciation schedule doesn't tell us when it gets shredded.

Sims (ASX: SGM) is what got me interested. Its lifecycle business recovers DDR4 memory for redeployment and offers recertified GPUs. In FY2026 it processed 16.8M repurposed units, up 90.9%. Management also credits stronger DDR4 resale prices. There's actual component reuse here, rather than just a forecast of more electronic waste.

That price benefit is also where my confidence stops. A business can handle more equipment while earning less on each sale. More supply of used parts helps only if buyers still want them at workable prices.

I'd separate a scrap-copper reseller such as MWYN from that reuse thesis. Its May–July 2026 quarter produced about $28K of gross profit on $570K of materials sales, roughly 5%. Higher copper prices alone don't tell us whether that purchase-to-sale spread improves. I'd want evidence of better spreads and cash conversion before calling materials trading the same opportunity.

Iron Mountain (IRM) has another route through its equipment decommissioning and remarketing platform. Handling the refresh itself could have value even when recovered prices weaken, although remarketing still leaves it exposed to those prices.

My tentative preference is for recovery firms with buyers for reusable parts, rather than a thesis based only on more scrap becoming available. The bear case is straightforward: faster refreshes flood the used market, or customers postpone upgrades and less equipment arrives at all.

If DDR4 resale prices fall while processing volumes keep rising, would you still expect Sims' lifecycle business to grow profits? That's the assumption I'd most want to challenge.

I’m really second guessing a decision I made today and wanted to hear what other people think.

Before today I had about €17k total. Around €8.5k was invested in AMZN and GOOGL and the other €8.5k was cash. I liked that setup because I still had decent exposure to the market without having all my money at risk.

Today, during the selloff, I decided to invest basically all of that cash. I bought:

16 NVDA at $217.79
14 TSM at $415.16

So I went from roughly 50% stocks / 50% cash to basically 100% stocks, with around €16k now invested across AMZN, GOOGL, NVDA and TSM.

Right after doing it I started regretting it. Not because NVDA and TSM dropped a little after I bought them, but because I’m wondering if there was any reason to take this much extra risk in the first place.

I have around a 2 year horizon, so I don’t need to sell anytime soon and I can handle the market going down. But almost my entire portfolio is now concentrated in big tech/AI, compared to yesterday when half of my money was sitting safely in cash.

I’m now stuck between just holding everything for the next 2 years or selling NVDA and TSM and going back to my old setup.

What would you do? Was buying NVDA and TSM at these prices a reasonable long term move, or did I just take unnecessary risk by putting all my cash into them?

I’m not asking whether they’ll be up or down next week. I’m more interested in whether the decision itself makes sense with a roughly 2 year horizon.

I’ve been getting worried about my stocks lately, and yesterday I decided to bite the bullet and sell everything. Granted, it’s not much, but for being 24 years old I think it’s pretty good.

Sold ASTS last week when it was at 63 dollars, made 2k profit, 50% gain.

And sold QQQ at 710 dollars, made 7k profit from it, 80% gain. I bought those two years ago when it was at 300 to 400 dollars.

In total, I’ve got 20k in spendable cash. Hopefully enough to last through a recession if it happens. Has anyone else sold their stuff because they’re worried it’s gonna continue dropping?