$AIXA
aixtron se2/10Does he own it?
No first-person ownership language anywhere. AIXA appears only as a sector index line item and as an analogy for MBE/equipment makers (vs Riber). When naming his own winners he cites others (AXTI, LITE), not AIXA. He is explicitly skeptical of machine-supplier names like AIXA at volume stage.
His thesis
AIXA is mentioned only as a reference point within a broader photonics/CPO supercycle thesis he expects to run for years. It serves as a representative example of a semiconductor capital-equipment (MBE/deposition) maker. He frames such tool suppliers as benefiting early in capex cycles but criticizes them for not capturing downstream production revenue, preferring actual volume producers or pure-play laser names over equipment vendors like AIXA.
How his view evolved
Across three tweets AIXA stays a peripheral comparison: first a single line in a sector performance list, then twice an analogy for equipment makers, with a stated skeptical lean toward such tool suppliers at volume stage.
Key points
- Cited only as a sector-index entry and as an analogy for MBE/equipment makers, never as a held position
- He names his own winners as other tickers (AXTI, LITE), not AIXA
- Expresses skepticism of equipment-maker names at volume production, favoring downstream producers
Derived from a holistic read of his public posts — paraphrased, never quoted. See his actual posts about $AIXA on X ↗