The Foxhole

Micron (MU) is booming, and it still doesn't look ‘expensive’ based on next year's earnings. So why does our own valuation say it could be worth 40% less?

📉 Boom-time math: Our discounted cash flow valuation puts Micron's fair value near US$565.
🎥 Straight from the founder: Al Bentley explains why a company's value is really all its future cash flows, brought back to today.
☀️ More than hot air: Why the summer's most obvious demand story comes with a catch.

A stock is worth every dollar of cash the company will ever produce, added up and discounted back to today. Not this year's profit at some arbitrary earnings multiple.

Micron (MU) makes the point beautifully. AI has its memory chips sold out and it's throwing off record cash, and even after a huge run it trades at only about 7 times next year’s projected earnings, which hardly screams expensive.

But run the cash flows forward and it shifts. Our discounted cash flow model, using analyst estimates, expects Micron's free cash flow to decline in the out-years, the way memory cycles have always eventually turned. Discounting those further out years of cash results in a fair value near US$565, well under the recent US$950 price. Same company, but two different answers, because one looks at the next year and the other considers every year.

What's a boom you're happy to own because you think it's here to stay?

Recent contrarian ideas

mitchell_lawler

Micron (MU) is booming, and it still doesn't look ‘expensive’ based on next year's earnings. So why does our own valuation say it could be worth 40% less?

A stock is worth every dollar of cash the company will ever produce, added up and discounted back to today. Not this year's profit at some arbitrary earnings multiple.

What's a boom you're happy to own because you think it's here to stay?

0 comments

mitchell_lawler

23h

People are still arguing about whether Nvidia's chips are the fastest. What if Jensen just built a moat that has nothing to do with the chips?

💰 Borrowing against Blackwell: Jensen Huang reframes an Nvidia chip as an "investable asset."
📈 Revised view: A community author grades their Nvidia call as it plays out.
🎯 Aged like wine: One author mapped this out a year ago. See how it held up.

We keep debating Nvidia (NVDA) on the usual turf… Is CUDA sticky enough, are the chips fast enough, can a rival close the gap? But look at what Jensen Huang actually did this week. He lined up more than US$500 billion from six of the biggest names on Wall Street and reframed an Nvidia chip as an "investable asset," something institutions can finance and borrow against like a toll road or an office tower. It is financial engineering, and it may be the least appreciated edge the company has ever built.

Here's why it matters. A moat made of performance can be out-engineered, and software lock-in can be escaped, eventually. But a moat built on financing is different. Once the world's largest pools of capital are set up to fund your product specifically, that capital flows to your buildout and not your rival's, no matter whose chip benchmarks better next year. Nvidia turned a fast-depreciating box into something Wall Street will underwrite for a decade. Competitors can copy the chips, but copying a half-trillion-dollar financing machine is a different problem altogether.

Is this what powers Nvidia's next leg up, or the setup for a Big Short sequel?

👍🧠🔥

14 comments

mitchell_lawler

The smartphone and the smartwatch were both supposed to unwind the mechanical watch. So why has Seiko (TSE:8050) roughly quadrupled in a year?

⌚ The cultural shift: Why Gen Z is slapping mechanical watches onto their wrists in 2026.

📊 Tick, tick, boom: Seiko Group has benefited as Grand Seiko goes global.

I'm a bit of a tech guy. When Apple launched its first watch in 2015, I thought it was a marvel and had to have one, and I've worn a few iterations since. So it surprised even me when I slowly found myself drawn to mechanical watches. They can't track my sleep, push a notification, or tell me the UV index, but that's kind of the point.

Recently I bought an entry-level Seiko, and I enjoy it for reasons that have nothing to do with function. Turns out I'm not alone. This thing was made obsolete multiple times: first by quartz, then by the smartphone, and last by the smartwatch. And yet Seiko has roughly quadrupled in about a year, with Grand Seiko outgrowing the big Swiss names among buyers in their 20s and 30s.

There’s a lesson in this, and it isn't "old things come back." It's timing of a narrative. Somewhere along the way the watch stopped being a way to tell the time and became a way to say something. That shift in what it means happened years before the market stopped pricing it as a relic. That gap, between a thing earning a new kind of value and the crowd still writing it off as a fossil, is paydirt for investors. By the time "actually, it's back" is the norm, the re-rating has already happened.

What's being written off as a relic today that you think has already found its new purpose?

👍🧠🥱🔥

12 comments

View all ideas