My views on Quantum Computing: they are in a speculative bubble and don't make money and likely never will (i.e. @MartinShkreli is right on fundamentals) BUT... are they burning enough cash for a no-brainer short? I'm not so sure 1/7

I have shorted and covered $QBTS (and $QBTX) to modest losses. But $QBTS loses "only" 27 Million per quarter, vs. $819 Million in Cash. That's nearly 8 years of runway! 2/7

D-Wave Quantum's cash burn to cash ratio is actually better than Quantumscape, a short I have had on that did not work (i.e. I lost money) despite me being "right" that they would not make one dollar of revenue (QuantumScape has nothing do with Quantum Computing btw) 3/7

For $IONQ, they are burning a lot more cash. (I think cash on hand might be higher because of $1 Billion issuance they did this summer). 4/7

I compare this to $STRYQ & $FAZE, two shorts of mine that did work, because they ran out of money very, very quickly (on $FAZE I actually lost money, but was very right on fundamentals & stock tanked quickly) Starry went bankrupt and FazeClan was taken over for a pittance 5/7

This is not to say I think @MartinShkreli is wrong on the fundamentals or that he is wrong these companies are very very likely to end in disaster for shareholders. Just to say that for **me** right now, what is holding me back from saying this is a "slam dunk short" is that $QBTS & $RGTI have too much cash on hand. This is for me. In an institutional setting, I could see shorting these quantum stocks (and especially shorting the 2x leveraged single stock quantum ETFs) against actual real advanced computing companies, namely semis such as $NVDA $AVGO $AMD etc. There is 1) shorting against longs, and then there is 2) shorting companies that you think are very likely to go down (and make money) and then get delisted and go bankrupt. I prefer option #2. De-listing and bankruptcy is likely coming for these quantum names but it will be years, perhaps many years 6/7

I reserve right to change my mind at a moment's notice. And again, for people in the back, I think Martin is right on fundamentals. Oh and by the way, my claim of "$QBTS losing $27 million per quarter" is accurate. Real figure is $27 Million, not $167 official number, this includes a 142 non-cash loss of revaluation of warrant liability which is truly non-material to fundamentals 7/7

All these ^charts I made with @fiscal_ai Monetary Matters listeners can get 15% of all Fiscal tiers at: