News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Intel stock collapse worsens as $3.5T chip rout spreads by bluegatty on Monday November 02, 2026 @11:24PM (#50348045)
The people doing most of the buying of most stocks are able to understand what is 'tik tok' and what is real.

The bulk of the buying is done by people who use modelling to derive the valuation, not vibes.

Because Intel is a household names, it's subject to vibes, but it's mostly math.

Underlying swings is usually some kind of new data point that, because there is so much growth involved, implies greater swings in valuation. So the impact of the news is amplified.

Re:Intel stock collapse worsens as $3.5T chip rout spreads by potamic on Tuesday November 03, 2026 @02:35AM (#50349145)
Do they all use the same models? How is it that they all arrive on such a large discrepancy with one small, new data point?
Re:Intel stock collapse worsens as $3.5T chip rout spreads by bluegatty on Tuesday November 03, 2026 @03:15AM (#50349392)
Because of the opaque nature of the inputs - and the leverage behind it.

Nobody knows what demand is going to be for AI in a few years, and that's causing this wild volatility.

It doesn't matter how well you understand the supply chain - that helps.

In many cases, it's literally trying to predict a herd: if the herd steers away from AI based on bad news about it not creating ROI, if the media sours, CEO's pullback, that could cause a slowdown in growth and therefore a crash.

Everything is highly leveraged.

An opaque input on Verizon forecasting model would not result in such a wild variation, they have more predictable operations.

Re:Intel stock collapse worsens as $3.5T chip rout spreads by potamic on Tuesday November 03, 2026 @04:27AM (#50349829)
I'm not so much surprised about the volatility as I am about all fund houses arriving at the same variation. I would've expected different models to arrive at different predictions and thus smooth out potential big jumps. So I'm finding it hard to understand how every model predicted 25% down instantaneously and simulatneously.

I don't know much about forecasting models and all, are you saying opaque forecasting is some kinda standardized technique and anybody doing opaque forecasting with the same data will likely end up with similar predictions?