Dr Burry doesn't need defending and you're right about his legacy. As for Cassandra, my point is that everyone DOES believe what he says. Burry gets namedropped in UK newspapers, FinTV, FinTwit...
But my real issue comes with the way the tweets read.
Look at the mystery he's deliberately created around himself and the games he's playing by speaking in riddles.
Would Buffett ever behave like this?
Ironically, Burry's become the Musk of the investing world. He's creating a cult of devout followers. Intentional or not, it doesn't feel "right."
Deleting tweets, going AWOL, reappearing telling people to "stay tuned", claiming victory on Covid tweets... maybe it's the British in me but this seems like a guaranteed way to create hype in the short term only to destroy a reputation.
To me, it's predatory when you have this much influence to behave in this way. Again, I point to Buffett who is lowkey and thoughtful in everything he says. Sometimes "No comment" is best when you're this famous.
Furthermore, this comes across as worse because he's not saying anything that's unknown.
This is unlike 2022 "transitory" inflation or GME or the GFC where he really saw something everyone had missed. This seems more ... odd and off character.
And I'm getting worried because how many fools out there are now going to short Palantir because of Burry or short big tech. Fools aren't just on the long side and Burry's even implied he's not short anyway. But he's not been totally clear about that. He should be.
Ok, you can make the case if a person acts it's their stupidity. BUT if a person has influence/power it's on them to be clear and transparent with their words. Not talk in riddles. 1.5m followers... that's a lot of people. And talking in riddles only makes communication more likely to be misinterpreted.
As for "level of overvaluation" that's no longer good enough as a case to be bearish. There has to be a catalyst or something that slows down growth. Until you spot it there's a chance "level of overvaluation" could be realised in a few years if growth expectations live up.
"Level of overvaluation" has actually been true since 2018. Watch some of Joel Greenblatt's talks from then. He's been talking about market underperformance for ages. And he's been wrong for that long.
Yes, the correction will probably come - but unless you could outline a clear thesis for why, you just got lucky. It could be tomorrow or in ten years. But the value investing way - to me - is buy cheap companies regardless of general market sentiment.
Tesla is the prime example of "level of overvaluation". Sure, it's overvalued. But the valuation has held up. Would you short it? Or ignore it? If you ignore it, why even bother to comment on it?
And that is exactly my issue with Burry's comments. It's very different when we're two guys speaking in a quiet forum making it abundantly clear neither of us are short AI.
I just don't think one can definitively say AI is a bubble. And I think saying that is wrong without some catalyst to back it up.
Tbh, your case for a bear market is more convincing than Burry's so far. I enjoy reading your Bear! posts lol.
Hopefully, you see where I'm coming from. Still a Burry fan. But not a fan of this "twitter" version of him. Think he's better off going on podcasts and speaking naturally or writing substack articles if he wants to genuinely communicate with fans.
PS - I think investors have gotten smarter since '99 and markets have gotten more efficient as information flow has gotten better and now that AI can digest situations even quicker.
Also, the depreciation debate goes both ways - increase the useful life, decrease EBITDA. Is EBITDA less useful than earnings given that every company reports adjusted EBITDA? I think general the market just skips both and goes straight to cash flow. |
