Everyone values $SPCX on Starlink. Starlink isn't where the money is going. Compare satellites. 4,000 compute satellites add up to one gigawatt of orbital compute. One gigawatt is roughly $50 billion a year in revenue. SpaceX already has 10,000 Starlink satellites in orbit. They don't come close to that. And the constraint isn't satellites. It's launch capacity. Every Starship flight is a slot, and slots are limited. Same logic as Tesla's batteries. A cell in a Cybercab earns several times more than the same cell in a Semi, so the Semi waits. Here, a Starship full of compute satellites earns something like 10 to 15 times more than one full of Starlink. Starlink is still a good business. It just loses every allocation decision from here on. $SPCX on

"Family Values" 💘 Episode 16: Jazmine and JR Cruz, partners in life and work reveal their hilarious, raw, and, inspiring path into the industry 🎙️ Only on Deep Thots 🔗 @ray_ray_xxx @RebelRhyderXXX @ItsTaylorGunner @JR_Cruz2020 @JazmineCruzOff1

Industry values Hyperliquid far higher than Pumpfun because it builds sustainable large businesses, while Pump is for speculation assets. Their potential differs greatly, creating the perception gap. Both are leaders in their verticals. Build on each with the right use cases.

Needham analyst Laura Martin values YouTube standalone at $340B, highlighting major upside for parent $GOOGL. $QQQ Martin's breakdown: Advertising business = $140B Subscription arm = $200B YouTube also enhances Google's main ad offerings and supplies proprietary video data to train Gemini models. Non-GAAP PEG ratio: Alphabet = 2.03 $META = 1.07 Alphabet's revenue growth = 20.05% Meta's revenue growth = faster than Alphabet's Seeking Alpha Quant Rating for Alphabet: Hold. Can YouTube turn Gemini into real monetization?