ratiman

I have no idea what this means but the Oanda traders have been a good contrary indicator. Unfortunately it doesn't have historical data but right now the wrong-way retail traders are majorly long oil. https://www.oanda.com/bvi-en/lab-education/tools/sentiment/

The SOH is now closed but good deal for you my friend. We are in the bargaining stage where every barrel of oil comes with unlimited middle eastern haggling. The rug merchants are now in charge.

This oil trade might be the greatest rug pull of all time. The oil bulls are absolutely out of their minds. Cushing has now reached tank bottoms and meanwhile oil sinks like a stone. It really is hilarious (as long as you have no position). I happen to think this is not over. Real oil inventory does matter at some point and a billion barrels can't be taken off the market / Iran given control of global oil supply without the price reflecting that sea change. But for right now the "lol nothing matters" crowd is winning.

If we get a 60 day window why wouldn't everybody scramble to top up their inventory? We might go right back to a blockade after 60 days and presumably China and US won't be drawing down SPRs during the 60 day window, if anything they will be building them back up. So if that is the case why wouldn't oil go UP if there's a deal?

If it doesn't get to $6 gas I will never listen to any oil bull ever again. If shutting down ME oil for 3 months hardly moves the price then it's basically no more scarce than salt water.

I thought the whole post was interesting. As for ERP seat vs fee based pricing, I'm not sure a major change to enterprise software business model is great news. It's easy to count and verify seats which makes it a convenient way to structure pricing. The alternative is untested.

Around 130 companies were asked some version of “is AI eating your business?” and said no. Almost all of enterprise software sits here — Salesforce, ServiceNow, Workday, Adobe, SAP, Atlassian — swatting the seat-compression question away like it’s beneath them. Now, none of this is secret. The denials are in the prepared remarks for anyone to read. And the pricing changes are in the press releases for anyone to read. The interesting thing is that they contradict each other. Almost every one of these companies is, at the same time, tearing out per-seat pricing and replacing it with usage-based pricing. Sit with the logic. If your software is sold per employee, and AI agents are about to do those employees’ jobs, then per-seat revenue is the exact thing AI threatens. A company that genuinely believed AI was harmless would have no reason to rebuild its entire pricing model on a deadline. When a company’s words and its pricing point in opposite directions, the pricing is the more honest signal — because it costs something. https://autonomousresearchcorp.com/research/ai-revenue-headwind

It seems like the overwhelming consensus is that oil is headed back down after a transitory spike. Institutions are bearish while professionals are alarmist. (via Paolo Macro on X)

Value Don't Lie has a lot of free posts. I think he posts here sometimes. https://www.valuedontlie.com/p/vdl-home-base

If this were a stock chart, it sure looks like a inverse head and shoulders and it points to price target of $180. Oil chart goes sideways for decades and then a big move establishes a new range. And before I get accused of being an oil permabull, I think I've posted once before on oil and it was a bearish thread on Exxon.

If conservatively estimating 10mm barrels a day is missing and assuming $5 per barrel of elasticity and assuming $65 price (WTI) before the conflict we would expect at least $115 but price should price in that this does not seem to be ending any time soon. Consider that US senators on left and right are both against a deal, as far as I can tell. This is nowhere close to being solved.

There's been some speculation that the futures are manipulated. Usually talk like that is just sour grapes but I might believe it in this case. If so you might expect price to go higher not lower after a deal. I continue to think that real pain is the only way we get a deal. Trump is still in the bargaining stage.

Neil Chapman, SVP of Exxon today at the Sanford Bernstein Strategic Decisions Conference (via Eric Nuttall)

You're asking the wrong guy, I have no idea. All I know is that Iran has not budged an inch and there is no sign that the two sides are close at all. It's like the Commanders negotiating with Terry McLaurin.

This is Iran military on X: I have no way to evaluate that, maybe it's posturing etc but I don't know, Say hello to $200 oil doesn't sound like somebody about to compromise.

I'd say greater than 50% chance of Brent over $150, not that anybody is on the edge of their seat waiting for my predictions but nothing I've seen so far makes me think Iran is ready to blink or Trump is ready for a humiliating climbdown.

At what price of Brent would you be wrong?

This period reminds of that time before March 11 when everybody realized COVID was a big deal but few were willing to go short. I can't really see how there is going to be a deal before the market crashes. Until then there won't be the urgency.

CAVA results came in strong with 10% SSS. Looks like the $20 lunch havers are still going strong, 2nd quarter also running at 10%. CAVA looks like the strongest of the restaurant stocks.

SBUX SSS were pretty good at 7% but tnathan above seems to think SBUX is also facing margin pressure. I have never understood Starbucks, total mystery to me why it is popular but I am not their target customer.

Dutch Bros is facing some fierce competition in Texas and the south. This might explain Dutch Bros margin problems last quarter. I don't think one restaurant category has ever seen this much capital deployed as quickly.

Todd was running Geico and running a big portfolio? That seems unlikely. The reason to shunt him off to Geico was to get him out of managing money. Ted's days are numbered.

I was doing some field research (went to McDonalds) and checked out the Dr Pepper Dirty Soda. It turns out a dirty soda is just a regular soda with syrup and some foam on top. If soda is not sugary enough for you, get a dirty soda. How is this even a real thing, it was 500 calories for a small cup, basically the same as a milkshake with whipped cream. I think the Mormons invented it but Mormons live healthy and splurge once in a while on Crumbl cookies or Dutch Bros milkshakes. This is not a sustainable trend, nobody can ingest this much sugar on a regular basis.

Some more context. The Chilis results are from the Triple Dipper, a sub-$20 triple appetizer plate. To me the Starbucks and Dutch Bros results stick out - Americans are really into drink customization / experimentation these days. McD's is rolling out new energy drinks and Monster just had a . . . huge quarter.

It's hard to talk about one restaurant stock without talking about the whole group and consumer trends so I wanted to create a thread for the easiest "know what you own" category of stocks. Here is a summary of recent trends