Longterms

" $SIVE can reach $80b because $LITE is $80b" has to be the dumbest and most dangerous investment thesis ever. People will lose their savings listening to all this misinformation. It's sad and needs to stop (I am starting an anti $SIVE crusade). 1. $SIVE is not a bottleneck (despite it being the poster child of the photonics bottleneck craze). A bottleneck, by definition, must be the company that constrains the production of a massive downstream industry. To constrain production, you must both own hard physical assets and hold a dominant market share position. Sivers has neither. Sivers is a fabless design company that relies on WIN for Foundry services, and with revenues of ~$30 million, they hold near zero market share in the massive datacom laser industry. 2. Supply chain analysis is misleading. In semiconductors (or any industry producing a durable manufactured good) switching costs are near zero while process power, cornered resources, and scale dominate. Therefore, "who has a superior product" is far more important than "who supplies what to whom." CPO external light sources require quality lasers meeting noise (linewidth and RIN) and power (400mW+) specs. $SIVE lasers are far inferior to that of larger peers like $LITE. 3. $SIVE valuation is comically detached from reality. On NTM metrics, $LITE trades at 14x EV/Revenue and 32x EV/EBITDA while $SIVE trades at 50x and 650x (!!) those same metrics. As a permanent AI infra bull, I fully agree that consensus is too conservative; however, they are not off by two orders of magnitude. The misinformation needs to stop. Let's help actually help retail understand what they own.