Market cap: $5.1 billion
What it does: Big data analytics
I asked, “What company is worth less than $10 billion today but you think could be worth $500+ billion in a few decades?”
I received 710 answers
Here are 20 top stocks that have 50x+ potential:
Market Cap: $5.4 billion
What it does: Discount e-commerce
The 10 minutes bull case for $WISH is available on my YouTube channel
https://t.co/gMtXz6Ma7v
Market Cap: $8.9 billion
What it does: Credit scores 2.0
Here’s the bull case in 5 minutes:
https://t.co/QhEvfTHeIB
Market Cap: $1.3 billion
What it does: Bring medical imaging to the world
Market Cap: $12 billion (slightly over)
What it does: Digital financial services
Here’s the bull case for $SOFI in 5 minutes
https://t.co/rmyPJLFVU4
Market Cap: $7.6 billion
What it does: High-quality outdoor gear
We covered the bull case for $YETI in 5 minutes
https://t.co/OidvJ7KZM7
I regularly tweet about money, investing, and personal finance
Follow me @BrianFeroldi
You may enjoy my other threads
https://t.co/9zUKu1NhAl
MEGA THREAD\U0001f9f5
— Brian Feroldi (@BrianFeroldi) April 25, 2021
My Mission: To Spread Financial Wellness
All of my best threads on money, investing, and self-improvement can be found below
*This list will be continually updated \u2b07\ufe0f
https://t.co/RLNPSyapag
What company is worth less than $10 billion today but you think could be worth $500+ billion in a few decades?
— Brian Feroldi (@BrianFeroldi) July 8, 2021
More from Brian Feroldi
More from Ideas
This thread is for investors or those who are interested in CDSL as an investment. Often the central reason quoted for an investment here is the gush of FCF the business produces and some float money also to boot. But this argument ignores a central problem as well. (1/11)
I completely agree that CDSL is a business that produces ample amount of Free Cash. So, it begs the question: "What are they doing with all that cash?" Generally, firms can utilize the cash on their books in 4 ways: Dividends, Acquisitions, Capex/Investments and Buybacks. (2/11)
CDSL does have a Dividend Payout Ratio of ~35-40%. But Dividends are the least efficient way of utilizing cash, due to the Triple Taxation on Dividends. More
Handled well, Inorganic Growth is so lucrative that some companies build their business models around acquisitions (Say, MSSL or Cyient). However, CDSL literally CAN'T be one such company. Read 7 (c) of the below regulatory document to know more:
https://t.co/071lwnnwJ4
(4/11)
CDSL can also reinvest cash into their own business, like most companies do. But CDSL (And most Exchanges) have little need for Capex/Reinvestment. CDSL's IPO came in at Rs. 523.99 Crores. Two years in, the Cash and Investments on their books stands at Rs. 650 Crores. (5/11)
I completely agree that CDSL is a business that produces ample amount of Free Cash. So, it begs the question: "What are they doing with all that cash?" Generally, firms can utilize the cash on their books in 4 ways: Dividends, Acquisitions, Capex/Investments and Buybacks. (2/11)
CDSL does have a Dividend Payout Ratio of ~35-40%. But Dividends are the least efficient way of utilizing cash, due to the Triple Taxation on Dividends. More
Handled well, Inorganic Growth is so lucrative that some companies build their business models around acquisitions (Say, MSSL or Cyient). However, CDSL literally CAN'T be one such company. Read 7 (c) of the below regulatory document to know more:
https://t.co/071lwnnwJ4
(4/11)
CDSL can also reinvest cash into their own business, like most companies do. But CDSL (And most Exchanges) have little need for Capex/Reinvestment. CDSL's IPO came in at Rs. 523.99 Crores. Two years in, the Cash and Investments on their books stands at Rs. 650 Crores. (5/11)
You May Also Like
1/“What would need to be true for you to….X”
Why is this the most powerful question you can ask when attempting to reach an agreement with another human being or organization?
A thread, co-written by @deanmbrody:
2/ First, “X” could be lots of things. Examples: What would need to be true for you to
- “Feel it's in our best interest for me to be CMO"
- “Feel that we’re in a good place as a company”
- “Feel that we’re on the same page”
- “Feel that we both got what we wanted from this deal
3/ Normally, we aren’t that direct. Example from startup/VC land:
Founders leave VC meetings thinking that every VC will invest, but they rarely do.
Worse over, the founders don’t know what they need to do in order to be fundable.
4/ So why should you ask the magic Q?
To get clarity.
You want to know where you stand, and what it takes to get what you want in a way that also gets them what they want.
It also holds them (mentally) accountable once the thing they need becomes true.
5/ Staying in the context of soliciting investors, the question is “what would need to be true for you to want to invest (or partner with us on this journey, etc)?”
Multiple responses to this question are likely to deliver a positive result.
Why is this the most powerful question you can ask when attempting to reach an agreement with another human being or organization?
A thread, co-written by @deanmbrody:
Next level tactic when closing a sale, candidate, or investment:
— Erik Torenberg (@eriktorenberg) February 27, 2018
Ask: \u201cWhat needs to be true for you to be all in?\u201d
You'll usually get an explicit answer that you might not get otherwise. It also holds them accountable once the thing they need becomes true.
2/ First, “X” could be lots of things. Examples: What would need to be true for you to
- “Feel it's in our best interest for me to be CMO"
- “Feel that we’re in a good place as a company”
- “Feel that we’re on the same page”
- “Feel that we both got what we wanted from this deal
3/ Normally, we aren’t that direct. Example from startup/VC land:
Founders leave VC meetings thinking that every VC will invest, but they rarely do.
Worse over, the founders don’t know what they need to do in order to be fundable.
4/ So why should you ask the magic Q?
To get clarity.
You want to know where you stand, and what it takes to get what you want in a way that also gets them what they want.
It also holds them (mentally) accountable once the thing they need becomes true.
5/ Staying in the context of soliciting investors, the question is “what would need to be true for you to want to invest (or partner with us on this journey, etc)?”
Multiple responses to this question are likely to deliver a positive result.
"I lied about my basic beliefs in order to keep a prestigious job. Now that it will be zero-cost to me, I have a few things to say."
We know that elite institutions like the one Flier was in (partial) charge of rely on irrelevant status markers like private school education, whiteness, legacy, and ability to charm an old white guy at an interview.
Harvard's discriminatory policies are becoming increasingly well known, across the political spectrum (see, e.g., the recent lawsuit on discrimination against East Asian applications.)
It's refreshing to hear a senior administrator admits to personally opposing policies that attempt to remedy these basic flaws. These are flaws that harm his institution's ability to do cutting-edge research and to serve the public.
Harvard is being eclipsed by institutions that have different ideas about how to run a 21st Century institution. Stanford, for one; the UC system; the "public Ivys".
As a dean of a major academic institution, I could not have said this. But I will now. Requiring such statements in applications for appointments and promotions is an affront to academic freedom, and diminishes the true value of diversity, equity of inclusion by trivializing it. https://t.co/NfcI5VLODi
— Jeffrey Flier (@jflier) November 10, 2018
We know that elite institutions like the one Flier was in (partial) charge of rely on irrelevant status markers like private school education, whiteness, legacy, and ability to charm an old white guy at an interview.
Harvard's discriminatory policies are becoming increasingly well known, across the political spectrum (see, e.g., the recent lawsuit on discrimination against East Asian applications.)
It's refreshing to hear a senior administrator admits to personally opposing policies that attempt to remedy these basic flaws. These are flaws that harm his institution's ability to do cutting-edge research and to serve the public.
Harvard is being eclipsed by institutions that have different ideas about how to run a 21st Century institution. Stanford, for one; the UC system; the "public Ivys".