u/wballz

This will probably get deleted but I can’t believe the guy just lives in his own bubble, can’t actually admit when he’s in the wrong.

His insta post where he’s hovering over the grass isn’t really a joke, it’s his way of having a dig at the officials without seeming too salty.

But end of the day he is just doubling down on it. His tweet says it is what it is and he still doesn’t believe it’s right.

If it’s borderline no worries. And most penalties I’ve seen in the past are usually inadvertent mistakes or players just being dumb in the moment. This one was deliberate. He tried to make it subtle by just walking over the grass but he couldn’t do that, he ends on stomping on it about 5 times over.

And people are still gonna laugh at his post about coming back on the wkend and feel for him? I watch way less golf than most people on here but I’ve not seen such deliberate cheating before and the guy continues to deny it.

Grow up Bryson

No spoilers as I haven’t watched round 3 yet.

But seems to me just based on the format the teams are going to be lopsided all season due to the format.

Format issues:

- each team has a captain. These 4 players are not going to be identical in skill.
- instead of offsetting the skill advantage of any captains, they have a match to set draft order.
- the draft ‘snake’ is uneven as captains only have to pick 3 players. The snake they used only helps when you have even number of rounds, 3 rounds give pick 1 the advantage.

So just play it out, rank all the players 1-16 and assume everyone plays to their rank.

Captains are rank 1-4.

Rank 1 wins the captains match.

Rank 1 has picks 1, 8 and 9.

The whole setup sounds good in theory and of course the best player would push this format on everyone. But they have the advantage from the outset.

Theoretical final teams:

1, 5, 12, 13 avg 7.75
2, 6, 11, 14 avg 8.25
3, 7, 10, 15 avg 8.75
4, 8, 9, 16 avg 9.25

Obviously everyone doesn’t play to their ranking and don’t get picked to their ranking. But the point stands. The structure is lopsided from the go.

Hoping someone here can clarify has he ever opened in a similar situation in a test match?

Is he ever used a Gilchrist type that can open up with a rush when you need it or come in down the order when you need a game breaker.

It’s my impression he’s never really played that role and this test didn’t call for that role either. Sounded like it was pure ego and attention in his retirement but I didn’t watch the match so maybe those impressions are unfair?

A coalition designed to cooperate and chip and hardware trade rules that exclude China is exactly what REXC was built for.

As the western world attempts to insulate its AI infrastructure from China trade risks, rare earths outside of China is a primary issue.

This is hugely bullish for REXC.

It’s the equivalent of having your opinionated local from the pub who’s wrong about everything hosting the show. It just kills all credibility to have a show run by a guy who exists purely for making big statements to try and create headlines that have no basis in reality.

Feels like I’m tuning into an episode of Alex Jones or something when Sam is running the show. I can’t stand to watch any episode he’s on, anyone else the same?

So a mate had recommended checking them out.

Ran them through the usual AI analysis to get an idea of what we are dealing with and bit of background and setup info.

The summary verdict was as follows:

This is a high-risk, high-optionality micro-cap speculative play, not an investment in the traditional sense. The genuine positives: blue-chip US fintech clients (Chime, SoFi, Robinhood), a real product with apparent product-market fit, and a massive ARR step-change if the March 2026 deal is real and recurring. The risks: pre-profit, heavily diluted, thin governance, and a share price that has already run hard off the lows and collapsed from October 2025 highs.

At A$0.029 with ~A$57-90m market cap against potential ARR of $10m+, the ratio is interesting — but execution risk is extreme. It fits a small speculative position if embedded fintech infrastructure is a thesis you want exposure to, but I wouldn’t size it like a conviction hold.

But really keen on any thoughts. I bought a tiny parcel today because it was so hard to buy at the top, felt like maybe I could get better value in a week or a month.

Anyone here into Stakk?

And if so does that mean I invest in Archer?

I held Archer during the hype run from $7 to $11 and I was looking at getting back in as it seems like the hype phase has died off but the commercialisation build up hasn’t really started yet so it’s at a bit of a low.

But then I started looking further into their timelines and their competitors and while EHang seem to be in another league I feel like the main focus is on Joby vs Archer and it seems like Archer has all the hype, the big connections with AI players and tech investors while Joby has the more traditional partnerships and steady measurable progress.

So how do you see it? Will Joby actually win in the end but Archer will have the better ride for investors in the meantime or is Archer primed to bounce on launch and then give up everything to Joby/eHang or are Archer the real deal?