SLNHSoluna
0看多1看空1提及
8-10 分观点使用大徽标▲ 看多▼ 看空● 提及
历史观点（2 条，最新在上）
- English · 原文Not all dilution is bad and depends on what structure. If you're doing a $600m ATM to build out laser fab capacity with $AAOI for $471m / month H1 2027 (at lower MC ranges), then that's accretive. If you're diluting 15% for NASDAQ listing requirements with $SIVE, and using proceeds for M&A, that's accretive. If you're diluting with $IQE and doing private placements with $MTSI to wipe off old toxic debt, that's accretive. If you're diluting $6,000,000,000 with $IREN, and likely selling that into the open market on every rally off the backs of $SLNH / $BKKT shills where majority of those retail went to 0, then that's predatory.中文 · 翻译不是所有稀释都是坏事，关键看结构。 如果你是在做一笔 $6 亿的 ATM 融资，用来建激光器晶圆产能，在 2027 年上半年每个月 4.71 亿美元（较低市值区间）的节奏下跟 $AAOI 合作，那这就是增厚型的。 如果你是为了满足纳斯达克上市要求，用 $SIVE 稀释 15%，然后把募集资金拿去做并购，那也是增厚型的。 如果你跟 $IQE 一起稀释，通过跟 $MTSI 做私募来清掉过去的有毒债务，那也是增厚型的。 但如果你是像 $IREN 那样，一次稀释 $60 亿，然后大概率趁 $SLNH / $BKKT 的托们每次拉升时把这些股抛到公开市场上——而这些小散里多数最后都归零了——那这就是掠夺性的。
- English · 原文Sure, #1 thing is toxic financing structure/float dynamics. Best example is current Neoclouds landscape: - $IREN is basically trash, since they have $6,000,000,000 ATMs and virtually infinite dilution, likely selling into every rally (structural overhang) - While $NBIS is now YTD 153%+, from optimal structures (eg. $NVDA direct funding, mix of convertibles, etc.). - On the other hand, $CRWV has endless debt interest given they took out high interest rate loans to finance GPUs. It's extremely nuanced, but you need to take a look at the float dynamics. If they're legitimately a good company, then it might be a good idea to go long after all the existing holders get diluted to oblivion. But if you care about your equity appreciation, it's a good idea to stay far away from toxic financing structures or toxic overhang (eg. debt interest, that eats away at a company FCF long term) With smaller companies, they have this all the time, like $SLNH, where there's new $500m ATMs on a $250m MC. Or like $BKKT where there's endless dilution to fund executive pay. With these companies you're basically transferring your money over to the company while influencers talk about them. So those are red flags. With many software names like $SNAP, they mask stock-based compensation with profitability. So while the company optically looks profitable, you'll likely see the value of your equity decrease due to dilution. There's endless types of these share structures you need to look when screening ideas.中文 · 翻译当然，第一重要的是毒性融资结构 / 流通股动态。 最好的例子就是当前的新一代云服务商格局： - $IREN 基本就是垃圾，因为他们有 60 亿美元的 ATM 增发额度，几乎无限稀释，大概率每次反弹都在卖（结构性压制） - 而 $NBIS 今年至今已经涨了 153%+，靠的是最优结构（比如 $NVDA 直接投资、混搭可转债等）。 - 另一方面，$CRWV 因为用高利率贷款买 GPU，背负着无尽的债务利息。 这事非常微妙，但你必须关注流通股的动态。 如果这家公司确实质地不错，那等现有持有人被稀释到快没了之后，或许是个做多的好时机。 但如果你在意自己股权的增值，就最好离这种毒性融资结构或毒性压制（比如债务利息长期蚕食公司自由现金流）远远的。 小公司里这种情况比比皆是，比如 $SLNH，市值才 2.5 亿美元，却搞了个新的 5 亿美元 ATM 增发。 或者像 $BKKT，为了给高管发工资搞了没完没了的稀释。 这类公司，基本上就是 KOL 们在吹的时候，你把钱转给了公司。所以这些都是红旗。 很多软件股，比如 $SNAP，会用盈利数据来掩盖股权激励。所以虽然公司账面看着是赚钱的，但你的股权价值很可能因为稀释而缩水。 筛选标的时，这类股权结构无穷无尽，你必须仔细看。