原文：
Serenity 白毛女-中文翻译（公开）
Serenity 白毛女-中文翻译（公开）
原文：
It’s interesting to witness psychology around valuation anchoring + scarcity.
Retail, for example, are buying Figure, last valued at ~$39B through CEFs…
At $158B, since it’s private, round 4x valuations.
Then Agility Robotics $CCXI, which has broader commercialization.
Is at ~$4.3B pre-money and publicly available before the name change. At closer pricing that $AMZN, $NVDA, SoftBank, and Foxconn vaulted it at.
Yet some end up paying 4-5x prices of already hiked private investor rounds for exposure…
I’m convinced if Agility raised a very small private round at $39B as well from $2.5B (which it definitely could), to set a valuation anchor.
Investors would be foaming in the mouth for a private allocation, just due to psychology rather than underlying fundamentals.
We’ve also seen this anchoring with $SPCX recently at $1.75T.
Peak market inefficiency? Or lack of knowledge from retail?
翻译：
很有趣的是，看到了人们在估值锚定和稀缺性方面的心理反应。
例如，零售投资者正在通过封闭式基金购买Figure，这家公司的估值曾达到约390亿美元……
私有公司的估值为1580亿美元，约为4倍的估值。
然后是Agility Robotics $CCXI，它具有更广泛的商业化应用。
其估值为约43亿美元，且在更名之前公开可得。其定价接近于$AMZN、$NVDA、SoftBank和富士康的估值。
然而，一些投资者最终支付了4-5倍的价格来获得已经被私募投资者抬高的估值的敞口……
我相信，如果Agility以250亿美元的估值进行了一轮非常小的私募融资（其估值可能达到390亿美元），这将会设定一个估值锚点。
投资者会因为心理因素而不是基本面的原因而渴望获得私募配额。
我们也曾在$SPCX最近的1750万亿美元估值中看到过这种锚定效应。
这是市场效率的巅峰吗？还是零售投资者的知识不足？ 🤔
It’s interesting to witness psychology around valuation anchoring + scarcity.
Retail, for example, are buying Figure, last valued at ~$39B through CEFs…
At $158B, since it’s private, round 4x valuations.
Then Agility Robotics $CCXI, which has broader commercialization.
Is at ~$4.3B pre-money and publicly available before the name change. At closer pricing that $AMZN, $NVDA, SoftBank, and Foxconn vaulted it at.
Yet some end up paying 4-5x prices of already hiked private investor rounds for exposure…
I’m convinced if Agility raised a very small private round at $39B as well from $2.5B (which it definitely could), to set a valuation anchor.
Investors would be foaming in the mouth for a private allocation, just due to psychology rather than underlying fundamentals.
We’ve also seen this anchoring with $SPCX recently at $1.75T.
Peak market inefficiency? Or lack of knowledge from retail?
翻译：
很有趣的是，看到了人们在估值锚定和稀缺性方面的心理反应。
例如，零售投资者正在通过封闭式基金购买Figure，这家公司的估值曾达到约390亿美元……
私有公司的估值为1580亿美元，约为4倍的估值。
然后是Agility Robotics $CCXI，它具有更广泛的商业化应用。
其估值为约43亿美元，且在更名之前公开可得。其定价接近于$AMZN、$NVDA、SoftBank和富士康的估值。
然而，一些投资者最终支付了4-5倍的价格来获得已经被私募投资者抬高的估值的敞口……
我相信，如果Agility以250亿美元的估值进行了一轮非常小的私募融资（其估值可能达到390亿美元），这将会设定一个估值锚点。
投资者会因为心理因素而不是基本面的原因而渴望获得私募配额。
我们也曾在$SPCX最近的1750万亿美元估值中看到过这种锚定效应。
这是市场效率的巅峰吗？还是零售投资者的知识不足？ 🤔
Could not load this section.