All holdings
JasonBullish
SacksBearish
FriedbergBullishJason1 take since Oct 24, 2025 Sacks1 take since Sep 20, 2024 Friedberg1 take since Nov 14, 2025
Oracle
ORCLBullishEnterprise software and cloud services company offering databases, applications, and infrastructure.Yahoo Finance ↗oracle.com ↗
3 takes · first discussed Sep 20, 2024 · last Nov 14, 2025
Stock since first call
+8.6%
$168.00 → $182.52
Current call
Bullish-7.4%
since Nov 14, 2025✗ wrong so far· stance 208d old
anchored Sep 20, 2024 · as of Jun 11, 2026
The tape vs. the takes
Every call, plotted at the price the day they made it.
letter = host · click for the quote
Where they stand now
Jason notes Oracle is 'coming on strong' as a fourth cloud competitor, suggesting its aggressive sales team could also benefit from enterprise multi-cloud diversification following the AWS outage.
E248 · Oct 24, 20251 take ↓
Sacks cites Oracle's $600M government contract for a visually primitive web portal as emblematic of the kind of egregious, overpriced legacy enterprise deals that AI will make impossible to justify going forward.
E196 · Sep 20, 20241 take ↓
Friedberg's defence of extended depreciation schedules for hyperscalers (including Oracle) applies equally here: real-world utilisation data justifies longer asset lives, and he believes Burry's short thesis on inflated earnings is mistaken.
E251 · Nov 14, 20251 take ↓
The discussion
The hosts hold a mixed but modestly positive overall view of Oracle. Jason and Friedberg lean bullish: Jason sees Oracle emerging as a credible fourth cloud competitor whose aggressive sales culture positions it to benefit from enterprise multi-cloud diversification, while Friedberg defends the accounting practices of hyperscalers like Oracle, arguing that extended depreciation schedules are justified by real-world utilisation data and that bearish short theses on inflated earnings are mistaken. Sacks is the lone dissenter, though with low conviction, pointing to Oracle's $600M government contract for a visually primitive web portal as a symbol of overpriced legacy enterprise deals he believes AI will render impossible to justify. The disagreement centers less on Oracle's cloud growth potential and more on whether its legacy business model and financial reporting hold up to scrutiny.
How they got there
Sacks cites Oracle's $600M government contract for a visually primitive web portal as emblematic of the kind of egregious, overpriced legacy enterprise deals that AI will make impossible to justify going forward.
this is egregious government waste... that site looks like it's pathetic... this looks like it could have been done with a SharePoint site and you pay some consultant to stand it up and for 1% of the cost.”32:28
Friedberg's defence of extended depreciation schedules for hyperscalers (including Oracle) applies equally here: real-world utilisation data justifies longer asset lives, and he believes Burry's short thesis on inflated earnings is mistaken.
I actually think Michael Burry's got this wrong.”8:34
iAbout these quotes
Quotes are machine-transcribed from the episode audio — use the Listen links to verify any take against the source, or the ⚑ link to report a problem. Takes marked unverified, low-conviction, or commentary-only never move stances, the index, or the funds.