3 still on the clock. Quotes in curly quotation marks are verbatim; everything
else is a labeled paraphrase. Every call links its original source. Before you trust the call, check the record.
Since they said it
10 directional calls with a price to read (10 bullish, 0 bearish). 1 week later, with the call in 4 of 10; 1 month later, with the call in 5 of 9. Prices as of 2026-09-10. Three fixed windows, the same for every call, always shown together: one week, one month, three months after the first close that followed the tape. What the market did, not a score: a call can have a different horizon, and a view with no number or deadline is never graded here.
Nasdaq from 2026-06-22 to 2026-09-10 · ▲ bullish · ▼ bearish · dot = the close that day
Date
Market
Call
What was said
1 week
1 month
3 months
2026-08-13
from 26,729
Nasdaq
Bullish
and it's always been our view-- that investors are way underestimating the scale and scope of the AI revolution.
I believe what Microsoft showed in that quarter, I think that's an inflection point for all of tech, because it shows what's happened to monetization and the hyperscowers. It's not just so important for Microsoft, but I think important for the overall sector. We're going to look back and this is going to be a monumental sort of turning point.
“15 to one demand the supply. This AI revolution is still third inning, but the hyperscalers, those are the ones, the ones that are funding the AI party, funding the capbacks.”
Dan Ives says counting China out of the AI race is the wrong bet, citing its lead in nuclear energy and robotics, and argues US chipmakers must keep selling into China.
So I think, as someone that might have spent so much time in the region, it's one like counting them out is the wrong bet.
Dan Ives says the biggest risk to the AI revolution is politics blocking data-center buildouts (e.g. New York's moratorium), not capex or use cases.
So I actually think the biggest sort of risk, when you think about what could happen to AI revolution, it's not cap backs. It's not use cases. The biggest risk is just the political piece gets in the way in terms of the data center build outs.
Dan Ives says OpenAI and Anthropic going public will further solidify the foundation of the AI revolution.
But that's why open AI and anthropic, when you think about as they go public and there is-- that just further solidifies the foundation for the AI revolution.
Bloomberg segment on the tech melt-up driving a $3.5T Nasdaq 100 gain in four days; Microsoft noted up 38% from the end of March.
I believe what Microsoft showed in that quarter, I think that's an inflection point for all of tech, because it shows what's happened to monetization and the hyperscowers. It's not just so important for Microsoft, but I think important for the overall sector. We're going to look back and this is going to be a monumental sort of turning point.
Acknowledges 'white knuckle moments' for Microsoft and tech but insists the AI revolution is early.
But the reality is, this earnings season shows you, you're in the third inning. I can maybe even say bottom of the second, you almost go back to where this is all playing out relative to monetization, especially on the hyperscalers.
Asked why Caterpillar 'just blew out numbers'; Ives ties industrials and energy names (e.g., Bloom Energy/Quanta-type plays, per garbled 'room energy, Quana') to the data-center capex build-out.
So this is, remember for every dollar in cap backs, there's a five to six dollar multiply across the rest of tax.
Ives says if he thought AI were in the 'seventh, eighth inning' he wouldn't have launched his firm; he thinks investors still underestimate 'the scale and scope of this broad theme.'
“It speaks to my view, third inning, one out, man on first.”
With SpaceX trading below its IPO price, Ives compares it to Amazon/Facebook post-IPO dead-money periods and lockup/indexing-driven volatility, while maintaining SpaceX is central to the AI 'fourth industrial revolution' long-term.
“it's hard to say fourth industrial revolution without SpaceX, but any company like a SpaceX, the valuation support is not there.”
Asked if Palantir is 'still the Messi of AI,' Ives says Karp is 'playing a different game,' that Palantir's every post-IPO quarter has been strong, and that the software/commercial story is 'still to come.'
“I think Palantir, it's hard to say that the AI revolution happens without a name like Palantir.”
Asked why SpaceX gets no analyst bump as it hits post-IPO lows, Ives says long-term investors will treat this as 'speed bumps' @0:32 and that 'Space more and more is going to be a huge part of the AI revolution' @0:41, comparing the setup to Facebook's and Amazon's early public years.
“This is a 26-mile marathon. I think we're only in mile one or two.”
On chips and mega caps he says 'it comes down to QQ earnings. That's really going to be the flash line in the dark tunnel' @2:16 (whisper garbles 'Q2' and 'flashlight'), calls the hyperscalers 'mostly in the penalty box' @2:33, and 'the demand storage still early' @2:44. 'Capbacks' is a whisper garble of capex.
“15 to one demand the supply. This AI revolution is still third inning, but the hyperscalers, those are the ones, the ones that are funding the AI party, funding the capbacks.”
Reacting to Warren Buffett picking Alphabet as a winner, Ives says 'A year ago, the New York City cab driver was Barish on it' @3:01 (garble of bearish) and frames Alphabet as one of the 'valuation names that you could rationalize in AI' @3:14 for value buyers like Berkshire.
“This is a perfect example. That fits well in, and they are at the epicenter of the build out, and especially when it comes on search.”