Please let me know your thoughts:

Block 1 — The market (why demand holds)

Thesis 1 — AI adoption has barely started. Healthcare, insurance, automotive barely use AI today. I work at an automotive supplier and can see firsthand that usage will go up multiples. Compute demand grows for years, not quarters.

Thesis 2 — Meta Compute validates the market. If Meta wants to sell compute, that proves compute is a valuable economic asset — that's not what oversupply looks like.

Block 2 — The company (why survives)

Thesis 3 — Cost leader. In-house designed servers and racks, ~20% better energy efficiency, no mechanical cooling, and per SemiAnalysis ClusterMAX: lowest price among all technically competent GPU clouds (Gold tier). In a price war, Nebius is the last one underwater — CoreWeave carries $25B of debt at ~5.6%, Nebius pays 1.25–2.6% on converts.

Thesis 4 — EU sovereignty. 750+ MW contracted in Europe (Finland 310 MW, France 240 MW). Sovereign EU demand (regulators, AI Act, governments) cannot be served by US hyperscalers — including Meta Compute. Structurally protected niche.

Block 3 — The future (why Nebius wins)

Thesis 5 — Ecosystem beats hyperscalers. Open-source models keep closing the gap and commoditize the model layer. The winner won't be whoever hoards capacity during a shortage — it's low cost + the best ecosystem for the many, not the few.

Thesis 6 — The Volozh factor. The CEO built Yandex and is one of maybe three founders who ever beat Google in an open market — with a fraction of the capital. That forced a culture of extreme infrastructure efficiency, which is exactly what you see in Nebius' cost base. The next bottleneck isn't raw compute, it's integrating AI components into systems that actually work — and management is positioning for that question before most people ask it.

Block 4 — The hidden safety net

Stakes worth an estimated $7.5–8B that have nothing to do with the GPU business:

Plus billions in cash. A meaningful chunk of the market cap is backed by assets outside the GPU cycle.