The Burry short is just one data point, but the "facts we know" are piling up fast.

Here is a possible roadmap for the coming correction:

1. The Timeline: We are looking at a winter. A very dark and cold winter. Whether it hits before Christmas or mid-Q1 is a rounding error; the gap between valuations and fundamentals has widened enough to be physically uncomfortable.

The Burry thesis—focused on depreciation schedules and circular revenue—is likely just the mechanical trigger for a sentiment cascade.

2. The Big Players:

Google: Likely takes the smallest hit. A merger between DeepMind and Anthropic is not far-fetched (unless Satya goes all the way).

By consolidating the most capable models under one roof, Google insulates itself from the hardware crash better than anyone else.

OpenAI: They look "half naked." It is becoming impossible to ignore the leadership vacuum. It’s hard to find people who’ve worked closely with Altman who speak well of his integrity, and the exits of Sutskever, Schulman, and others tell the real story.

For a company at that valuation, leadership credibility isn’t a soft factor—it’s a structural risk.

3. The "Pre-Product" Unicorns: We are going to see a reality check for the ex-OpenAI, pre-product, multi-billion valuation labs like SSI and Thinking Machines.

These are prime candidates for "acquihres" once capital tightens. They are built on assumptions of infinite capital availability that are about to evaporate.

4. The Downstream Impact:

The second and third tier—specifically recent YC batches built on API wrappers and hype—will suffer the most from this catastrophic twister.

When the tide goes out, the "Yes" men who got carried away by the wave will be shouting the loudest, pretending they saw it coming all along

Very helpful, an AI comment analyzing an analysis of AI

I don't believe your comment is just a direct dump out of an LLM's output, mainly because of the minor typo of "acquihires", but as much as I'd love to ignore superficial things and focus on the substance of a post, the LLM smells in this comment are genuinely too hard to ignore. And I don't just mean because there's em-dashes, I do that too. Specifically these patterns stink very strong of LLM fluff:

> leadership credibility isn’t a soft factor—it’s a structural risk.

> The Timeline/The Big Players/The "Pre-Product" Unicorns/The Downstream Impact

If you really just write like this entirely naturally then I feel bad, but unfortunately I think this writing style is just tainted.

Is this AI-written?

lemme see your PUTS please :)