Eric Jackson

I don't spend my time looking for the next 10% trade. I'm looking for the next Carvana, like when I got into it at $15 in May 2023. The next stock the market has written off that could become worth 10, 20, even 100 times more. But finding one means doing the work most people skip. Reading the filings. Understanding the debt. Studying the management and board. Figuring out what the market is missing — and what would prove the thesis wrong. I share my broader thinking publicly. My X subscribers get the deeper research, ongoing thesis updates, the evidence I'm tracking, and a private AMA Space with me every week. Not every idea works. Not every stock deserves to be bought. And sometimes the right answer is to do nothing. If you want to understand the work behind the conviction, that's what my subscriber community is for. Subscribe through my X profile.

👀

Will be on @YahooFinance tomorrow morning with @BrianSozzi and friends discussing l’Affaire Jensen, AI and tech

CRWV is exploding higher this morning. +23%. Yes last night after the numbers came out, the stock was DOWN 3+%. We immediately told our subs the numbers were GOOD. Most investors are focused on the wrong number. It's not the earnings beat. It's $20–25 MILLION. That's the annual revenue CoreWeave says its newest 4–5 year contracts can generate per megawatt of AI capacity. Goldman now estimates 20–30% unlevered project IRRs. And the financing model may be changing. Goldman sees $106. Morgan Stanley sees $70. That's a HUGE difference in how Wall Street is underwriting the same company. Last night, I published my CRWV earnings analysis for X subscribers. This morning, I'm digging into what the rally actually means—and what the market could still be missing. If you want my deeper, numbers-driven investment research before the next big market move, become an X subscriber. Subscribe through my profile.

COCO CHANEL OWNED JUST 10%. THE WERTHEIMERS OWN 100%. In 1924, Coco Chanel received just 10% of the perfume company bearing her name. The Jewish Wertheimer family received 70%. During the Nazi occupation of France, French journalists report that Chanel tried to acquire their shares through antisemitic property-seizure laws. She failed. Then, after the war, the Wertheimers financed her comeback, bought her fashion house, and eventually owned the entire Chanel empire. Why would they rescue the woman who reportedly tried to take their company? I followed the contracts, the ownership, and the archival reporting. This is a story about genius, capital, betrayal, and a history that commercial success cannot erase. Influence is not ownership. A royalty is not control. The Business of Tomorrow.

Drake finally wheels up from Houston.... he's had a great birthday month

CRWV is up 5.5% after hours. Everyone is talking about 168% revenue growth and $133 billion in backlog. But I think the most important part of tonight's earnings call was something else entirely. Management laid out a potential SECOND economic life for its GPU fleet. 130,000 GPUs coming off contract in 2027. Another 170,000 in 2028. And potentially ~$10 BILLION in annualized revenue from recontracting that capacity at today's prices. Here's the part that matters: management says the original contracts will have already paid off the associated equipment debt. This raises a fascinating question about the economics of AI infrastructure that goes well beyond CRWV. What happens when a massively capital-intensive business starts generating revenue from assets it no longer needs to finance? I've been digging into the numbers, the assumptions, and what could invalidate this thesis. My deeper analysis is going to subscribers. The headline is growth. The real story may be residual asset economics. Subscribe in the bio.

CoreWeave $CRWV just reported: Revenue: $3.66 BILLION (+168% YoY) Backlog: $132.5 BILLION Contracted power: 4.6+ GIGAWATTS And the stock was DOWN ~5% after hours. Why would investors sell a company growing this fast? Look deeper. $846M in quarterly interest expense. $9.4B in quarterly property and equipment purchases. $37–39B in expected 2026 capex. This is the part of the AI boom I think investors are underestimating. There are two very different ways to make money from AI infrastructure. One is to own and finance the GPUs. The other is to own and develop the power-backed infrastructure underneath them. And the economics could be dramatically different. I just published my full breakdown for X subscribers, including: • What CoreWeave's results really tell us about AI demand. • Why its financing burden matters. • The read-through to $HUT and $WULF. • Where I think the more attractive long-term shareholder economics could emerge. The next AI winners may not be the companies with the most GPUs. They may be the companies that own what those GPUs can't operate without. Full analysis for subscribers. If you're interested, subscribe in my X bio.

Our Nov 2 call works again @EventHorizonIQ

OLD KANYE vs. NEW KANYE: IS HIS BEST CHAPTER STILL AHEAD? Kanye West has reinvented himself more times than almost any artist of his generation. Producer. Rapper. Designer. Entrepreneur. Cultural visionary. We’ve seen the Old Kanye. We’ve seen the New Kanye. But what if the most important Kanye is the one we haven’t met yet? Greatness isn’t always a straight line.

MARC JACOBS: WHO OWNED THE MISSING 20%? I went through three years of LVMH financial statements. Every Marc Jacobs company listed showed the same ownership interest: 80%. Not 100%. Then LVMH sold the brand in 2026. Now two companies share the intellectual property. One operates the business under licence. Marc Jacobs is still Founder and Creative Director. But does he actually own any of the brand? The documents I’ve examined don’t answer that. His name is on the label. But whose name is on the ownership documents?

A Basquiat sold for $110.5 MILLION. But the buyer didn’t get the copyright. Years later, Dom Pérignon licensed a DIFFERENT Basquiat painting through the estate’s licensing agent. One buyer owns a canvas. The estate says it controls the rights to reproduce the art. Two very different businesses.

Ye and Virgil Abloh interned at Fendi for $500 a month, per Fendi's then-CEO. In 2021, LVMH's accounts put $291 million of the purchase price on the brand Virgil founded. The value wasn't created inside the institution.

Wanted to share this news this morning: SunCar (NASDAQ:SDA), a leader in digitalizing China's auto insurance and services sectors, forecasts nine month revenue of $426 million, a 26% YoY increase and net income of $5.8 million, a significant improvement from a loss of $4.1 million YoY as well as the 5th consecutive profitable quarter. Growth is being driven by increased synergies between the auto insurance and services segments.  The Company this morning also announced a $10 million buyback program.    Usual disclosure about SDA, I am a paid advisor to the company so this isn’t financial advice.

In 2021, LVMH bought half of Jay-Z's champagne brand. Its accounts allocated $390M of the price to the brand itself. Pharrell got the creative chair at Louis Vuitton. Jay-Z kept half the company. Access. Control. Ownership. Only one gives you a share of what the brand becomes.

$DHI is a better business than $OPEN today. D.R. Horton just earned $742M in a quarter. Opendoor LOST $218M. So why am I still **LONG $OPEN**? Because I believe Kaz is building something potentially much bigger than a homebuilder. A platform that could dominate BOTH 1P and 3P residential real estate transactions. First in America. Eventually, globally. But Q3 exposed some serious problems with profitability that bulls shouldn't ignore. The question isn't whether DHI is more profitable today. It obviously is. The question is which business could be worth substantially more in 2030–2035. I just published my full investment thesis for X Subscribers, including why DHI outperformed OPEN today, what Kaz still needs to prove, and the three things that could change my mind. I'm long OPEN. But I'm not blind to the risks. Subscribe in my bio to read the full breakdown.