Puts are too obvious at this point. Still finished the day with +4.5%. B U L L I S H

---

B-b-but it has AI features up the wazoo!

---

I mean this is only partially true. They have 52bn in annual revenue, a lot of that from their design business which is very profitable and they have patents that are hard to value like x86. Also I'd have to do the math but $25 is probably still less than book value. Their P/B was around 0.70 last time I looked.

---

It’s the weekend. Market is closed. But we need some action. Let’s get a bet going on how Diddy will kill himself; a. Hanging b. Wrist slashing c. Murder by an inmate that was a 2Pac fan

---

yeah that's dumb, but my friend had a G Wagon and sold it because he never drives it and either A. rents a car or B takes uber/lyft. He lives in the city of course.

---

I'd say $25 is pretty low. That's probably lower than p/b and they won't offer less than p/b. In order to get a deal like this done the acquiring firm usually has to pay a small premium to make it attractive to shareholders.

---

Not going to happen. How is a semi company going to trade at .3 P/B? INTC cannot hit single digits without being bought out.

---

B-b-b-but bols told me we were gunna end green with a mega V!

---

It’s very clearly not a real ad because a) even if you don’t like the Conservatives they’re not actually stupid so wouldn’t put this out b) it’s clearly been stuck over the top of the actual ad spot rather than slotted it c) political adverts in the UK have to have an imprint on them, which is small section of text that looks something like ‘printed and promoted by A on behalf of B, both at C address’. I actually think this particular picture is a less subtle version of a similar fake poster that said ‘we plan to cut homeless people in half by 2025’, this version has added the word ‘all’ in which makes it even more obviously fake. In the hypothetical scenario that was a real but misworded ad it should say ‘we plan to cut homelessness in half by 2025’.

---

>partially not fully Without US military intervention Taiwan military would crumple in 90 days assuming no tactical nuclear strike to end the fight on a few weeks https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA1658-1.html >Because of Taiwan’s military disadvantages and low durability, successfully withstanding a large-scale Chinese attack would require military intervention by the United States. A well-led and socially cohesive Taiwan might be able to mount a determined resistance for a long time, but, without a robust U.S. military intervention, China’s enormous advantage in military resources likely would allow it to eventually subjugate the island. In conclusion Taiwan is a client state of the U.S. >yeah area close each other has similar culture Taiwan’s culture is directly imported from mainland China b/c a majority of the population came from the mainland. Many of them still have family on the mainland and many trace their roots literally across the strait. The cultural heritage and similarities are so close it’s as if it’s another Chinese province. I know you are trying to play down the cultural similarities to make it as if the two states are vastly different like Vietnam and Korea compared to China, but you are just misleading. >China has no control of Taiwan B/c of the threat of U.S. intervention??? Like why are you trying to avoid the elephant in the room. US intervention is the only thing preventing China’s reunification. >The KMT didn’t care about the communist [Shanghai massacre](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shanghai_massacre) The KMT literally started the Chinese Civil War by secretly planning and purging CCP members that were already working for and with the KMT party who they helped unify China from the Beiyang government from the north. KMT was literally the coward that backstabbed the CCP who already ceded government and national control to the KMT. It was literally the KMT party who fucked up a united China that caused a split and this was before the Japanese invasion. The same KMT party who despite having a superior military and funding backed initially by the USSR and then USA lost a civil war that they started and fled to Taiwan. Now is saying, yo bro, I’m the victim bro! I’m victim for losing the war that I started. ROFL, you don’t know shit about Chinese modern history and the cross strait relations

---