Ran (@FeberPitch) header
Ran (@FeberPitch) profile picture

Energy engineer trying to figure out where the puck is going. Building a concentrated portfolio. Arsenal FC ❤️ 🇸🇪

Sverige
Joined March 2016
Photo by Ran (@FeberPitch)Photo by Ran (@FeberPitch)Photo by Ran (@FeberPitch)Photo by Ran (@FeberPitch)Photo by Ran (@FeberPitch)Photo by Ran (@FeberPitch)Photo by Ran (@FeberPitch)Photo by Ran (@FeberPitch)Photo by Ran (@FeberPitch)
Pinned Tweet
The "Kardashev" Option: Why SpaceX's Orbital Data Centers Make Tesla the Ultimate AI Infrastructure Play In a recent FCC filing (Jan 2026), SpaceX outlined a vision that changes everything: 1 million satellites forming an Orbital Data Center network. The partner providing the "brain" and the "heart" of this constellation will be Tesla. Here is an engineering-first breakdown of the multi-trillion-dollar "hidden option" for TSLA: 1. The Physics of Space-Based Compute AI on Earth has hit the "Energy Wall." Terrestrial data centers are limited by grid capacity and water-cooling constraints. SpaceX’s solution: launch 1 million tons of payload per year via Starship to capture constant solar energy (1,360 W/m²) and use radiative cooling in vacuum. Goal: add 100 GW of AI compute capacity annually. 2. Tesla as the Exclusive Hardware Engine To reach 100 GW/year, SpaceX needs a massive, vertically integrated partner. Tesla is the only entity capable of scaling this: - The Brain: Tesla AI7 (server-grade). Based on Apple's "Ultra" scaling logic, assume a high-performance variant drawing 400 W per chip to maximize inference per kg. - The Heart: Tesla Energy. Custom, radiation-hardened solar arrays integrated directly into the satellite chassis. 3. The Engineering Math (Annualized) - Compute goal: 100 GW/year - Chip volume: 100 GW ÷ 400 W/chip = **250 million chips/year** - Solar volume: 100 GW of panels/year For perspective, 250 million high-end AI chips per year is nearly 5× current global production of top-tier AI silicon. Tesla’s upcoming Terafab is the only facility designed for this throughput. 4. The Revenue Model (Conservative Estimates) Assume 30% gross margin for Tesla (internal Musk-ecosystem pricing): - Chip sales: 250M units @ $2,857 price ($2,000 COGS*) = $714B revenue - Solar sales: 100 GW @ $500/kW = $50B revenue - Total annual profit for Tesla: ~$230 billion *Based on Munro’s HW3 analysis, adjusted for AI7 complexity. 5. The Sensitivity Analysis (Risk vs. Reward) - The "Elon Factor" (5-year life): Elon suggests 5 years is the limit to avoid tech debt and ensure de-orbit. This increases replacement cycle, pushing Tesla’s annual profit to $368B. - Conservative view (8-year life): baseline $230B profit/year. - Thermal constraints: if cooling limits chips to 200 W, Tesla must sell double the chips to hit 100 GW—doubling profits. 6. Valuation: A New Asset Class Applying a standard tech multiple to this $230B recurring profit stream: - 20× P/E: +$4.6 trillion - 35× P/E (growth): +$8.0 trillion - 50× P/E (AI mania): +$11.5 trillion 7. Conclusion SpaceX provides the logistics (Starship), but Tesla provides the value-add hardware. This vertical integration creates the first Kardashev-level infrastructure in history. For TSLA shareholders, the "Orbital Data Center" is a free option today that could be worth 10× the current market cap within a decade.
1
4
647
Cybercab är ca 50% billigare per mil än Model Y sett över bilens hela livslängd. 80-90% av alla taxiresor görs med 1–2 personer. Med ca 50-70% cybercabs i robotaxi-flottan kan Tesla nå bäst balans av service och operationella kostnader för nätverket.
I have a hunch Elon might discontinue the Cybercab within two years. A two-seat design is just silly. It automatically rules out groups of more than two passengers and families, yet plenty of fanboys are still defending their Master Elon. Why reinvent the wheel? Just take a Model Y, remove the steering wheel and pedals, and make it autonomous. It would be much simpler and more practical. Alternatively, just redesign the Cybercab as a four-seater. Then it would just be a golden color Model Y without steering wheel and pedals. The Cybercab has a massive trunk, but for a robotaxi, that trunk space would sit empty most of the time. What's the point? @elonmusk $TSLA
1
116
Whether you’re an AI bull or bear be thrilled so many investors think you’re dead wrong. The gap between what AI believers and skeptics see has never been bigger. And current valuations leave plenty of room for either side to be spectacularly right or wrong. That’s where the opportunity is. Stop getting pissed at people who disagree with you. If you’re right those people are the reason there’s still so much money to be made. Anyway happy Friday everyone. life is good. Hook ’em
100
55
6
1,413
110,850
This is what $1 million worth of Tesla Cybercabs vs. $1 million worth of Gen 6 Waymos looks like:
329
980
141
11,538
734,377
Who’s running these bots? Someone clearly wants to promote negativity about AI. Make you wonder…
25
Ran retweeted
I know a lot of people are disappointed that Tesla hasn’t released any meaningful new information about Optimus for a while. We’re essentially in the dark about its latest progress, while at the same time watching Chinese humanoid robots perform incredible stunts at the World Humanoid Robot Games in China. It’s hard not to wonder what Tesla has been working on behind the scenes—and when we’ll finally get a glimpse. Wait no more! Glad to hear what @Jason said in the interview. Even though he said he couldn’t say what he saw but he did say a lot though😅 Jason: “I saw one of the latest Optimus demos. I teased it at the beginning of the show. Can’t say what I saw, but I can tell you what I saw is better than anything I just saw at these World Games. Optimus is going to be the greatest product ever made by humanity. It is next level. It’s being built by Tesla — you know, they ripped out the Model X and the Model S factory lines and they’re building these. Optimus is going to… if Optimus came to these games, I would predict Optimus wins thirty-five of fifty-one contests.” Host (right): “What specific… why… what puts Optimus so far ahead of like Unitree or… or these companies that were showing off at Beijing?” Jason: “I think… you know, in addition to the hardware that I think is one and a half generations beyond these, I think the brain is like five generations behind these. This isn’t to diss anything happening in China — they’re building legit stuff — but I think Optimus is going to be the greatest selling product in the history of humanity. It will sell and provide more value than the iPhone. I would say iPhone is the greatest product made in the history of humanity up until this point in terms of popularity, usage… you know what I’m saying, Lon? Like utility to the… you could say the smartphone, but if you had to pick of the smartphones, you would say iPhone. Of the robots, Optimus… I will guarantee you, we will be sitting here in ten years, and there will be one billion Optimus in the world. I didn’t say one million, I didn’t say ten million, I didn’t say a hundred million — I said one billion. I think there’ll be one billion Optimus robots in 2036.”
66
132
34
966
128,832
Och ändå kommer sossarna förmodligen vinna valet 🤦‍♂️.
sweden has right now the highest economic growth in the western world
1
34
sweden has right now the highest economic growth in the western world
88
272
32
1,909
181,189
True wisdom on structuring collectives of human beings to achieve amazing things. It's no coincidence that Elon has built multiple multi-billion dollar companies. Read it. Then read it again.
Elon Musk sent every Tesla employee a memo that took authority away from their managers and handed it to them. He never asks for more hours. Every rule moves a decision closer to the person doing the work. Musk: “Excessive meetings are the blight of big companies and almost always get worse over time.” Companies have a role for everyone who creates process and no role for anyone who removes it. Meetings and approval chains survive because removing them was never anyone’s job. Musk: “Walk out of a meeting or drop off a call as soon as it is obvious you aren’t adding value.” Attendance has always been treated as proof of commitment. He made it worthless, and contribution became the only thing that counts in the room. Musk: “It is not rude to leave, it is rude to make someone stay and waste their time.” Ordinary manners protect whoever called the meeting. He moved that protection to everyone else sitting quietly with real work waiting on them. Musk: “Don’t use acronyms or nonsense words for objects, software, or processes at Tesla. Anything that requires an explanation inhibits communication.” Internal vocabulary converts knowledge into status and charges every newcomer a fee to participate. A company that speaks plainly can absorb talent at full speed. Musk: “Communication should travel via the shortest path necessary to get the job done, not through the chain of command.” Most good ideas die in transit, three levels below anyone with the power to act on them. Musk: “Any manager who attempts to enforce chain of command communication will soon find themselves working elsewhere.” The only threat in the entire memo. A manager who insists on being routed through is buying his own relevance with everyone else’s time. Musk put a price on it. Musk: “Always pick common sense as your guide. If following a company rule is obviously ridiculous in a particular situation, the rule should change.” Following a bad rule normally shields you. Exercising judgment exposes you. He flipped which one carries the risk, and every rule now has to earn its place against the person applying it. Every institution drifts toward protecting its own comfort. The ones that keep building are held together by people who rewrite the rules back down to something a single person can act on. Nothing on that list requires a budget, a headcount, or a title. You can run the entire memo from wherever you are sitting right now. Most people never test it and never learn it was permitted the whole time.
87
China added 311 GW of solar in 2025 alone. To put that in perspective: US hyperscalers (AWS, Microsoft, Google, Meta, Oracle, xAI) are planning 70–100 GW of total AI data center capacity over the next 5 years. China builds more solar every year than the entire US AI pipeline will draw by 2030. Infrastructure speed is a policy choice.
1
1
145
A little unsettling to see all the bullishness on Bitcoin today. Makes me think perhaps there’s still some optimism left to crush before it’s really time to take off again.. bitcoin:native
35
I did NOT understand the potential of SpaceX or SpaceXAI. Holy crap!
1
107
This is the future we must choose.
306
2,037
130
26,514
541,738
Ran retweeted
Anthropic ha lanzado una guía de 37 minutos para construir Agentes de IA que automatizan una empresa entera. Gratis. De los ingenieros que construyeron Claude. Agentes que trabajan, se reparten tareas y ejecutan todo solos. Subtitulado al español. Guárdate este post. 🔖
110
991
46
9,336
5,138,388
Market is overreacting to hyperscale credit spreads widening from my perspective. TL;DR Spot pricing for renting GPU compute materially above contracted rates implies hyperscalers are underearning while operating cash flow acceleration is an underestimated source of funds for AI capex. The fact that spot prices for GPU rentals are at least 2x higher than contracted rates is the missing piece from the discussion about hyperscaler credit, which is the only fundamental factor behind this selloff. Multiple private companies are planning on spending at least 2x more per GPU for compute as contracts roll-off and some have spoken about this publicly.   As contracts roll-off, hyperscale growth rates are going to continue to accelerate as their installed bases of compute reprice higher. Hyperscale operating cash flow growth using a mix of estimates and actuals is modeled to accelerate from 31% in the first quarter of 2026 to 50% in the second quarter. This acceleration should continue for the rest of the year and this is not in estimates which incorrectly model a deceleration in the third quarter from my perspective.   Some math. Consensus estimates are probably for 25-35 gigawatts added by hyperscale and neoclouds in CY28 (using a range as standing up datacenters is hard and a lot of the neos plus labs are still private).  At 60b per gigawatt, that is 1.5 to 2.2 trillion in capex. Consensus estimates for hyperscale/neo operating cash flow is 1.3 to 1.4 trillion. I think this gets revised up materially as contracts reprice and growth accelerates so the 100b to 700b that would hypothetically need to be plugged by debt goes away. And their credit profiles materially improve. Not to mention the said 100b to 700b would be less than 1 turn of incremental leverage on consensus EBITDA estimates. And obviously the Nvidia and Broadcom “credit wrappers” help improve creditworthiness as well given their FCF profiles.   OpenAI, Cursor/Grok and the various Open Source inference clouds have accelerated materially over the last two months per public data and Anthropic continues to grow insanely fast while likely generating FCF. This - along with the fact that spot prices for GPU rentals are so far ahead of contract - are the missing pieces from the BofA chart on hyperscale FCF vs. semiconductor FCF.   Hyperscalers are underearning and anyone who signed a contract for GPU compute in 2024 and 2025 is overearning. Operating cash flow will be enough to fund capex but as contracts reprice and cloud growth continues to accelerate then spreads likely come in as well.  
Would also note that CDS markets are easy to manipulate - was a huge feature of the GFC - short the stock and then buy the CDS. So I would not put attach much signal to CDS. 
Net, net I’m not that concerned about the widening spreads in hyperscale credit. The real risk is that bringing power online and energizing all these GPUs is really hard but we are getting better at this every day.
🤖 Made with AI
302
701
139
5,323
1,493,204
Madame Celeste Amarilla, Vous êtes une femme méprisable et indigne de sa fonction. Vous ne représentez pas le Paraguay, ce pays qui a transpiré la passion et l’honneur tout au long de la compétition. Par votre inconscience et votre racisme décomplexé, le monde entier a déjà oublié le parcours et l’effort historique que vos joueurs ont réalisés durant cette coupe du monde pour laisser place à une dame incompétente donnant la pire image possible de son pays. Je ne laisserai jamais aux gens comme elle, la liberté de laisser propager leur haine et leur racisme à travers le monde.
46,885
334,841
34,249
1,798,824
92,422,904
The metric I keep coming back to for SpaceX is $/Mbps to orbit Starlink exists because Falcon 9 dropped bandwidth deployment costs ~10x to ~$6.55/Mbps. That’s about to drop again to just $0.30/Mbps because of Starship. A business that is doubling users annually with a 63% adjusted EBITDA margin is about to cut their biggest cost by 95%… It really seems like people don't understand the implications of this. The math assumes a reusable Falcon 9 launch is 17 tonnes at $1,000/kg and 2,600 Gbps per launch. Starship is targeting 100 tonnes at under $185/kg and 61,000 Gbps per launch. That's $17M for 2,600 Gbps ($6.55/Mbps) verse $18.5M for 61,000 Gbps ($0.30/Mbps). Starship's additional volume allows for larger satellites, enabling simultaneous gains on multiple cost curves. The math suggests V3 satellites are ~600 Mbps/kg vs ~150 Mbps/kg from V2 mini. Combining the 4x improvement on satellite bandwidth density with a 5x improvement in launch gets you the 20x improvement to 30 cents per Mbps to orbit. These are fairly conservative assumptions because launch probably comes in even lower as Starship ramps, and satellite improvements probably keep coming. At $0.10 / Mbps, $1 billion spend on launch represents 10,000 Tbps or about 15x the bandwidth of Starlink's constellation today. $1B is 90 days of operating income for Starlink... at it's current scale... Yeah, I really don't think people are getting this. Starlink is the internet now.
202
418
56
4,133
374,800
In medieval times, within the arms race of ever more demonic torture devices, some sadistic genius came up with the idea of the Little Ease. This was a prison cell built so small in every dimension that a grown man could not stand upright in it nor lie down at full length nor properly sit. The pain is relentless and without relief and inflicted by one's own body. Prisoners were known to go insane within a few days. A stay at the Little Ease was considered even more cruel than the rack, the thumbscrew, and the other ghoulish machinery of the Tower of London. A breeding pig will spend her whole life in a version of that box. These are social, roaming creatures (more intelligent than dogs) who will never leave this corset of steel. They have been selectively bred to be bigger than their frames can support. Yet we put them in cells so confined that they cannot comfortably sit, and their attempts to do so (for example, by sneaking their limbs into adjacent stalls) reliably lead to fractures and sprains. They cannot sweat, yet have nothing to roll around in to cool themselves off. Except their own manure, which (contrary to the common misconception) they are so averse to (thanks to their strong sense of smell) that new sows will often suffer from constipation to avoid soiling the space from which they eat and sleep. Here is how the writer Matthew Scully described what saw at one of Smithfield’s “gestation barn”: > “Sores, tumors, ulcers, pus pockets, lesions, cysts, bruises, torn ears, swollen legs everywhere. Roaring, groaning, tail biting, fighting, and other “Vices,” as they’re called in the industry. Frenzied chewing on bars and chains, stereotypical “vacuum” chewing on nothing at all, stereotypical rooting and nest building with imaginary straw. And “social defeat,” lots of it, in every third or fourth stall some completely broken being you know is alive only because she blinks and stares up at you … creatures beyond the power of pity to help or indifference to make more miserable, dead to the world except as heaps of flesh into which the [insemination] rod may be stuck once more and more flesh reproduced.” — The Save Our Bacon Act is trying to unroll the few state protections we have against this barbaric cruelty - for example California’s Prop 12 - which banned the sale of pork from pigs kept in gestation crates. It’s incredibly important we don’t end up with this sort of federal preemption. SOB will not only kill the most important animal welfare related laws in the US of the past decade, but more importantly, it will also restrict ALL future legislative progress (aka how the animal welfare movement has gotten its biggest wins). The Senate is currently deciding whether to add the SOB Act to the Farm Bill. With relatively little money now, we can discourage the most pivotal senators in the Ag committee from backing this amendment. Defeating this bill is even more important given the amount of philanthropic funding I expect to come online in the next year or two. It will plausibly be over 10x more expensive to repeal SOB than to prevent it from passing in the first place. All that money that could be spent transforming our society's relationship to mass animal suffering will instead have to be spent just getting us back to where we are right now. That's why money spent now fighting this bill (and I mean right NOW) is so effective. If you’re in a position to donate six figures, please DM me.
99
774
72
4,510
542,236
I got blocked for this. And I'm a subscriber to his research. Is my recommendation too personal? I honestly tried to give advice that could help him convince people like myself..
Replying to @alojoh
My recommendation is to not go all the way to full blown EDS. The readers can feel your emotive state through the tweets nowadays. Almost like TSLAQ back in the day. Critique is good but keep it in the realm of reality of you want to have a real impact on undecided people.
1
45
I love you Arsenal ❤️ Especially you @biel_m04
3
27