原文：
Serenity 白毛女-中文翻译（公开）
Serenity 白毛女-中文翻译（公开）
原文：
If I had to be critical of $SIVE earnings:
1. Management underweighted the two disclosures that matter most.
-> 6 pluggable engagements
-> Foundry capacity (during an industry bottleneck)
That's the most important part of the call and should have been the focus to provide economic scale of them. But we got 2-3 sentences about it.
And it shouldn't take an Anime avatar on X to talk most about the implications of those.
2. CFO needs retraining or bring on a new one.
The lawyer like answers were infuriating to listen to as a shareholder. Even I got pissed off with this statement:
"we will evaluate the timing and decide whether the conditions are right to move forward at that particular time."
It should be a 100% given by now they file for dual listing to escape hostile Swedish markets.
Shareholders didn't fund a future growth type company to hear lawyer-like answers.
Again, this was probably one of the worst answers the CFO could have gave and there needs to be firm commitment along with faster timelines.
3. $70M should have gone toward M&A and dual listing.
-> Brutally honestly speaking, it's a waste of capital to focus on hybrid manufacturing at this stage and I was disappointed to hear this during this timeframe.
It's eventually needed but with 2 foundry suppliers
-> You have a ton of new capital and large marketcap.
Use it to pull $AVGO style acquisitions of Cloud Light style IP for pluggables or optical engines.
Lumilens went from 0 -> $5.5B in 2 years and now with hyperscaler engagements.
Sivers should expand out of the laser chokepoint as fast as possible and not stay just a component vendor.
And most of all, who cares about competing with customers? If a customer says: "if you do pluggables, we'll go with other players for lasers"
who?? $LITE / $COHR / $AAOI reroutes their lasers to internal usage. Lot of your Asian players
If I had to be critical of $SIVE earnings:
1. Management underweighted the two disclosures that matter most.
-> 6 pluggable engagements
-> Foundry capacity (during an industry bottleneck)
That's the most important part of the call and should have been the focus to provide economic scale of them. But we got 2-3 sentences about it.
And it shouldn't take an Anime avatar on X to talk most about the implications of those.
2. CFO needs retraining or bring on a new one.
The lawyer like answers were infuriating to listen to as a shareholder. Even I got pissed off with this statement:
"we will evaluate the timing and decide whether the conditions are right to move forward at that particular time."
It should be a 100% given by now they file for dual listing to escape hostile Swedish markets.
Shareholders didn't fund a future growth type company to hear lawyer-like answers.
Again, this was probably one of the worst answers the CFO could have gave and there needs to be firm commitment along with faster timelines.
3. $70M should have gone toward M&A and dual listing.
-> Brutally honestly speaking, it's a waste of capital to focus on hybrid manufacturing at this stage and I was disappointed to hear this during this timeframe.
It's eventually needed but with 2 foundry suppliers
-> You have a ton of new capital and large marketcap.
Use it to pull $AVGO style acquisitions of Cloud Light style IP for pluggables or optical engines.
Lumilens went from 0 -> $5.5B in 2 years and now with hyperscaler engagements.
Sivers should expand out of the laser chokepoint as fast as possible and not stay just a component vendor.
And most of all, who cares about competing with customers? If a customer says: "if you do pluggables, we'll go with other players for lasers"
who?? $LITE / $COHR / $AAOI reroutes their lasers to internal usage. Lot of your Asian players
Could not load this section.