Offshore
Photo
Fiscal.ai
Adobe is spending all of its cash flow (and then some) on share buybacks.
LTM Free Cash Flow: $9.9 billion
LTM Repurchases: $11.3 billion
$ADBE https://t.co/l5mjjYPrNA
tweet
Adobe is spending all of its cash flow (and then some) on share buybacks.
LTM Free Cash Flow: $9.9 billion
LTM Repurchases: $11.3 billion
$ADBE https://t.co/l5mjjYPrNA
tweet
Offshore
Photo
memenodes
The moment you realize you might not be able to retire your parents this crypto bull run
tweet
The moment you realize you might not be able to retire your parents this crypto bull run
Apart from breakup, what else can make a man be like this? https://t.co/22DS3dadq7 tweet
Offshore
Photo
EndGame Macro
The Bet That Backfired And How the World Built Its Economy Around China
That map isn’t really about trade rankings. It’s about how the global economy slowly organized itself around one production engine and only realized the consequences years later.
Back in the late 1990s and early 2000s, the prevailing idea in Washington was constructive engagement. The belief was simple and, at the time, widely shared that if you bring China into the global trade system, give it access to markets, and economic integration would pull it toward openness, reform, and convergence with Western norms. Leaders promised this would expand U.S. exports without hollowing out domestic industry, arguing America could export products without exporting jobs. It sounded reasonable in a post Cold War world that still believed economics could tame geopolitics.
Once China received permanent normal trade relations and entered the WTO, the incentives flipped almost overnight. U.S. and European firms suddenly had certainty. Capital moved fast. Supply chains followed. And China didn’t just offer cheap labor…it offered scale, speed, infrastructure, and eventually entire industrial ecosystems clustered in one place. That’s when manufacturing stopped being something you could easily move back and forth. It became embedded.
Why the Bet Went Wrong
The core mistake wasn’t opening trade. It was assuming China would play by the same rules.
Western policymakers treated China like a market economy in waiting. China treated trade as a state project. While global firms optimized for efficiency, Beijing optimized for capability. Subsidies, directed credit, technology transfer, and long term industrial planning weren’t bugs in the system, they were the system. China never dismantled state control the way advocates assumed; it used global access to accelerate it.
At the same time, the political costs were unevenly distributed. Consumers benefited from lower prices. Corporations boosted margins. But manufacturing regions lost jobs, skills, and bargaining power. That tension simmered for years while trade deficits widened and supply chains grew more concentrated. By the time the backlash arrived, the structure was already locked in.
That’s what the 2024 map is really showing. Not that China won trade but that the world built its physical economy around the one place that could reliably make almost everything, all the time. Even now, when countries talk about diversification or decoupling, much of the upstream machinery, components, and inputs still trace back to China. The dependence is deeper than final assembly.
The uncomfortable truth is globalization was designed for efficiency, not resilience. China mastered that system faster and more deliberately than anyone else. Reversing it isn’t a switch you flip, it’s a slow, costly rebuild. And until that happens, the map stays red, even as politics tries to move in the opposite direction.
tweet
The Bet That Backfired And How the World Built Its Economy Around China
That map isn’t really about trade rankings. It’s about how the global economy slowly organized itself around one production engine and only realized the consequences years later.
Back in the late 1990s and early 2000s, the prevailing idea in Washington was constructive engagement. The belief was simple and, at the time, widely shared that if you bring China into the global trade system, give it access to markets, and economic integration would pull it toward openness, reform, and convergence with Western norms. Leaders promised this would expand U.S. exports without hollowing out domestic industry, arguing America could export products without exporting jobs. It sounded reasonable in a post Cold War world that still believed economics could tame geopolitics.
Once China received permanent normal trade relations and entered the WTO, the incentives flipped almost overnight. U.S. and European firms suddenly had certainty. Capital moved fast. Supply chains followed. And China didn’t just offer cheap labor…it offered scale, speed, infrastructure, and eventually entire industrial ecosystems clustered in one place. That’s when manufacturing stopped being something you could easily move back and forth. It became embedded.
Why the Bet Went Wrong
The core mistake wasn’t opening trade. It was assuming China would play by the same rules.
Western policymakers treated China like a market economy in waiting. China treated trade as a state project. While global firms optimized for efficiency, Beijing optimized for capability. Subsidies, directed credit, technology transfer, and long term industrial planning weren’t bugs in the system, they were the system. China never dismantled state control the way advocates assumed; it used global access to accelerate it.
At the same time, the political costs were unevenly distributed. Consumers benefited from lower prices. Corporations boosted margins. But manufacturing regions lost jobs, skills, and bargaining power. That tension simmered for years while trade deficits widened and supply chains grew more concentrated. By the time the backlash arrived, the structure was already locked in.
That’s what the 2024 map is really showing. Not that China won trade but that the world built its physical economy around the one place that could reliably make almost everything, all the time. Even now, when countries talk about diversification or decoupling, much of the upstream machinery, components, and inputs still trace back to China. The dependence is deeper than final assembly.
The uncomfortable truth is globalization was designed for efficiency, not resilience. China mastered that system faster and more deliberately than anyone else. Reversing it isn’t a switch you flip, it’s a slow, costly rebuild. And until that happens, the map stays red, even as politics tries to move in the opposite direction.
Over two decades China became the largest source of merchandise imports for two-thirds of countries đź“Š https://t.co/MqjRs5rWSt tweet
Offshore
Photo
Fiscal.ai
CAVA's management team wants 1,000 restaurants by 2032.
What's stopping them?
$CAVA https://t.co/cyhguCkIQz
tweet
CAVA's management team wants 1,000 restaurants by 2032.
What's stopping them?
$CAVA https://t.co/cyhguCkIQz
tweet
Offshore
Photo
Fiscal.ai
20% of Lululemon's revenue now comes from China.
That's up from 15% last year.
$LULU https://t.co/qAakePh0qK
tweet
20% of Lululemon's revenue now comes from China.
That's up from 15% last year.
$LULU https://t.co/qAakePh0qK
tweet
Offshore
Photo
EndGame Macro
Q3 2025 Crane Index With Fewer Cranes, Tighter Money, Slower Momentum
The RLB Crane Index is a ground truth snapshot of real construction activity. It counts tower cranes actively operating on job sites across major North American cities. No surveys, no forecasts just a physical read on how busy large scale construction actually is.
Total crane counts are down. A meaningful share of cities saw sharp declines, and commercial construction is taking most of the hit. Seven of the sixteen cities recorded drops greater than 20% from the prior count, and commercial cranes are down 44% overall. That’s capital stepping back.
The map is mixed. Seven cities are down, six are flat, four are up. The areas holding up best skew toward education, federal projects, and transportation. That’s a quiet but important signal about who still has both the willingness and the ability to spend.
You see the same pattern in the sector breakdown. Commercial, hospitality, industrial, and public/civic are weaker. Education, federal government, and transportation are firmer. Residential and mixed use are broadly flat. Rate sensitive private development is pulling back while institutional, public, and select demographic demand keeps building.
How we got here (and why it looks like this)
The simple explanation is that the cost of money rose and risk tolerance fell. Big projects don’t die because the narrative changed they die because the math stopped working.
The city details make this clear. In New York, crane counts fell from nine to six, tied to high rates, financing constraints, and projects wrapping up. That’s underwriting reality in 2025 that fewer deals clear the hurdle, and even solid projects struggle to secure clean financing. In Las Vegas, mega projects move forward while other hotel and casino builds are paused amid tariff uncertainty and high rates a classic late cycle behavior where capital concentrates into can’t lose bets and sidelines the marginal ones. In Boston, the decline reflects projects finishing rather than a sudden slowdown, but fewer new starts are visible. The pipeline is being worked down faster than it’s being refilled.
At the same time, the economy doesn’t just tip over because pockets of real demand still exist. Miami still shows strong residential tower activity driven by population growth and in migration. Denver is up meaningfully, transitioning from a residential boom into a more diversified pipeline. Some cities are still building, others are quietly stalling.
That’s exactly what a late cycle, high rate environment looks like. The winners keep building, the middle stalls, and the weakest categories disappear from the skyline.
Is the Crane Index leading or lagging?
It’s both. Relative to money and permitting, it lags, cranes only go up after financing, approvals, and risk decisions are already made. By the time cranes come down, the no decisions happened months earlier. Relative to official economic data, it can lead. Construction is one of the first places tight financial conditions show up in the real economy.
My View
This is a tight money economy wearing a calm mask. The market is still functioning, but fewer large risks are being taken. Private risk is retreating while public and institutional spending fills part of the gap. That stabilizes activity, but it rarely creates a broad, self reinforcing growth cycle.
Commercial real estate remains the pressure point. A 44% drop in commercial cranes is lenders and capital partners refusing to believe the old growth assumptions. The macro implication isn’t immediate collapse. It’s slower forward momentum. The clean takeaway is that we’re late cycle. The skyline isn’t panicking but it’s clearly being selective.
tweet
Q3 2025 Crane Index With Fewer Cranes, Tighter Money, Slower Momentum
The RLB Crane Index is a ground truth snapshot of real construction activity. It counts tower cranes actively operating on job sites across major North American cities. No surveys, no forecasts just a physical read on how busy large scale construction actually is.
Total crane counts are down. A meaningful share of cities saw sharp declines, and commercial construction is taking most of the hit. Seven of the sixteen cities recorded drops greater than 20% from the prior count, and commercial cranes are down 44% overall. That’s capital stepping back.
The map is mixed. Seven cities are down, six are flat, four are up. The areas holding up best skew toward education, federal projects, and transportation. That’s a quiet but important signal about who still has both the willingness and the ability to spend.
You see the same pattern in the sector breakdown. Commercial, hospitality, industrial, and public/civic are weaker. Education, federal government, and transportation are firmer. Residential and mixed use are broadly flat. Rate sensitive private development is pulling back while institutional, public, and select demographic demand keeps building.
How we got here (and why it looks like this)
The simple explanation is that the cost of money rose and risk tolerance fell. Big projects don’t die because the narrative changed they die because the math stopped working.
The city details make this clear. In New York, crane counts fell from nine to six, tied to high rates, financing constraints, and projects wrapping up. That’s underwriting reality in 2025 that fewer deals clear the hurdle, and even solid projects struggle to secure clean financing. In Las Vegas, mega projects move forward while other hotel and casino builds are paused amid tariff uncertainty and high rates a classic late cycle behavior where capital concentrates into can’t lose bets and sidelines the marginal ones. In Boston, the decline reflects projects finishing rather than a sudden slowdown, but fewer new starts are visible. The pipeline is being worked down faster than it’s being refilled.
At the same time, the economy doesn’t just tip over because pockets of real demand still exist. Miami still shows strong residential tower activity driven by population growth and in migration. Denver is up meaningfully, transitioning from a residential boom into a more diversified pipeline. Some cities are still building, others are quietly stalling.
That’s exactly what a late cycle, high rate environment looks like. The winners keep building, the middle stalls, and the weakest categories disappear from the skyline.
Is the Crane Index leading or lagging?
It’s both. Relative to money and permitting, it lags, cranes only go up after financing, approvals, and risk decisions are already made. By the time cranes come down, the no decisions happened months earlier. Relative to official economic data, it can lead. Construction is one of the first places tight financial conditions show up in the real economy.
My View
This is a tight money economy wearing a calm mask. The market is still functioning, but fewer large risks are being taken. Private risk is retreating while public and institutional spending fills part of the gap. That stabilizes activity, but it rarely creates a broad, self reinforcing growth cycle.
Commercial real estate remains the pressure point. A 44% drop in commercial cranes is lenders and capital partners refusing to believe the old growth assumptions. The macro implication isn’t immediate collapse. It’s slower forward momentum. The clean takeaway is that we’re late cycle. The skyline isn’t panicking but it’s clearly being selective.
tweet