$JBL

Does he own it?

Repeatedly excludes JBL from his holdings: when floating Jabil as a long idea he twice states he has no position, and in a same-day disclosure names only NBIS/TSEM/AAOI as his financial interests in that cap range. JBL appears almost solely as a downstream customer validating his Sivers long, not as something he buys, holds, or sizes.

His thesis

Jabil is framed as a key validation node for his Sivers thesis: Jabil chose Sivers DFB lasers for its 1.6T LRO pluggable transceivers (built on inherited Intel silicon-photonics IP), with a fireside chat suggesting a strong performance moat, demand outstripping supply, and a pulled-forward mass-production timeline into late 2026/2027. Separately he calls Jabil itself a compelling contrarian long around $38B, arguing the market has not priced its 1.6T pluggable business, but presents this as an idea for others, not a position.

How his view evolved

Early on Jabil is purely a customer proof-point cementing the Sivers laser thesis. Over time, after the formal Jabil-Sivers deal and a bullish fireside chat, he separately pitches Jabil as an underpriced direct long, while explicitly disclaiming any position.

Key points

• JBL serves mainly as customer validation for his core Sivers long, not as a holding
• He twice states he has no JBL position and lists his actual same-cap holdings as NBIS/TSEM/AAOI
• Genuinely bullish on Jabil's 1.6T LRO pluggable business as an underpriced idea for others

Derived from a holistic read of his public posts — paraphrased, never quoted. See his actual posts about $JBL on X ↗