These investors are betting on Greece's founders
Several of Greece's region's most active early-stage investors joined StrictlyVC and TechCrunch at our event in Athens to share where they're placing bets, how founder expectations are shifting, and why Europe's next wave might be its strongest yet. The conversation explores everything, like emerging ecosystems, cross-border growth, and what it takes to win deals in 2025.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Europe Frets About US Retreating From Region Ahead of NATO
(Bloomberg) -- NATO's European allies are focused on getting through this week's summit unscathed. But even if President Donald Trump is satisfied with fresh pledges to ramp up spending, anxiety is growing about the US military presence in the region. Bezos Wedding Draws Protests, Soul-Searching Over Tourism in Venice One Architect's Quest to Save Mumbai's Heritage From Disappearing JFK AirTrain Cuts Fares 50% This Summer to Lure Riders Off Roads NYC Congestion Toll Cuts Manhattan Gridlock by 25%, RPA Reports Only after the June 24-25 summit meeting in The Hague – where North Atlantic Treaty Organization members will pledge to spend 5% of GDP on defense – will the US present its military review, which will spell out the scope of what are likely significant reductions in Europe. With some 80,000 US troops in Europe, governments in the region have factored in at least a reversal of the military surge under former President Joe Biden of about 20,000 troops. The stakes got significantly higher overnight after US struck nuclear sites in Iran with the risk that Trump will get sucked into a spiraling conflict in the Middle East after being a vocal critic of US military involvement overseas. His foreign policy U-turn will be a topic that will be hard to avoid at the gathering, especially with NATO ally Turkey present and a key stakeholder in the region. Europeans have been kept in the dark on the Trump administration's plans. But officials in the region are bracing potentially for a far bigger withdrawal that could present a dangerous security risk, according to officials familiar with the discussions who declined to be identified as closed-door talks take place before the review. Up until early June, no official from the US had come to NATO to talk about the US force posture review, spurring concern among allies that this could be done at very short notice, according to a person familiar with the matter. It's unclear whether European nations have started planning to fill any potential gaps left by US forces. Withdrawing the aforementioned 20,000 troops could also have an even greater impact if other NATO allies follow the US lead and remove their troops from the east. The worry with even deeper cuts impacting US bases in Germany and Italy is they could encourage Russia to test NATO's Article 5 of collective defense with hybrid attacks across the alliance, the person familiar also said. Since returning to the White House, Trump and his allies have warned European capitals that – despite the mounting threat from Russia – they need to take charge of their security as the US turns its military and diplomatic focus to the Indo-Pacific region. Contacted by Bloomberg, NATO declined to respond to questions but referred to a statement by NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte in early June. When asked about a US drawdown from Europe, he said it was normal they would pivot to Asia. 'I'm not worried about that, but I'm absolutely convinced we will do that in a step-by-step approach,' Rutte said then. 'There will be no capability gaps in Europe because of this.' The White House referred questions to the Pentagon. 'The U.S. constantly evaluates force posture to ensure it aligns with America's strategic interests,' a defense official responded. The geopolitical shift is likely to have enormous consequences for the 32-member alliance, which is weathering its greatest challenge since it became the bulwark against Soviet power in the decades after World War II. European militaries long reliant on American hard power will have to fill the gap as Washington scales back. If a troop reduction focuses on efficiency, it would be far less problematic for Europeans than one that hits critical assets and personnel that Europe couldn't replace immediately, according to one European diplomat. The nature of a withdrawal would be more important than the troop numbers, the person said. A dramatic pullout announcement is likely to trigger an instant reaction from eastern member states, with those closer to Russia immediately requesting deployments from Western European allies. The holistic review of the US military, which Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth says should focus on threats facing the US, is meant to reflect the tilt in the global power dynamic, bringing potentially large-scale redeployment of weapons and troops. But European diplomats have bristled at the timing of the review, taking place only after NATO signs off on its most ambitious new weapons targets since the Cold War — with member states agreeing to foot the bill. A withdrawal that is more dramatic than anticipated will mean that, after acceding to Trump's ramp-up in defense spending, they still may be left with a heavy burden to respond to a rapidly growing Russian military. 'We would be remiss in not reviewing force posture everywhere, but it would be the wrong planning assumption to say, 'America is abandoning'' or leaving Europe, Hegseth said in Stuttgart in February. 'No, America is smart to observe, plan, prioritize and project power to deter conflict.' After the Trump administration balked at providing a backstop to European security guarantees to Ukraine, a pullout of more US troops could embolden Russia's Vladimir Putin, according to people familiar with the matter. 'The question is when pressure is on for a greater focus on the Indo-Pacific, what capabilities do they need to think about moving,' said Matthew Savill, director of military sciences at RUSI, a defense think tank. 'I don't get an impression that they have yet decided what that means for force levels in specific terms.' Germany, Europe's richest and most populous nation, is positioning itself to take on the largest share of the redistribution. Defense Minister Boris Pistorius is taking the lead in building out the military after the country scrapped constitutional debt restrictions when it comes to security. Berlin will do the 'heavy lifting,' he's said. Pistorius recently unveiled a new battle tank brigade in Lithuania and has said the country is committed to boosting its armed forces by as many as 60,000 soldiers. The military currently has about 182,000 active-duty troops. European governments are pushing Washington to communicate its plans clearly and space out any troop draw-downs to give them time to step up with their own forces. 'There are some capabilities, like deep precision strikes, where we Europeans need some time to catch up,' said Stefan Schulz, a senior official in the German Defense Ministry. He called for any US reduction to be done in an orderly fashion, 'so that this process of US reduction is matched with the uplift of European capabilities.' The ideal scenario would be an orderly shift within NATO toward a stronger Europe that would take about a decade, said Camille Grand, distinguished policy fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations and a former NATO assistant secretary general. A more dire scenario would involve a US administration acting out of frustration with European progress and drastically reducing troop presence. Grand said a 'plausible' scenario would be a cut to about 65,000 US troops, matching a low-point figure before Russia's annexation of Crimea in 2014 — a level that NATO could manage. 'But if we go below that, we are entering uncharted waters, a different world,' Grand said. --With assistance from Courtney McBride and Milda Seputyte. (Adds a graph of context referencing developments in the Middle East in fourth paragraph.) Luxury Counterfeiters Keep Outsmarting the Makers of $10,000 Handbags Is Mark Cuban the Loudmouth Billionaire that Democrats Need for 2028? Ken Griffin on Trump, Harvard and Why Novice Investors Won't Beat the Pros The US Has More Copper Than China But No Way to Refine All of It Can 'MAMUWT' Be to Musk What 'TACO' Is to Trump? ©2025 Bloomberg L.P. Error al recuperar los datos Inicia sesión para acceder a tu cartera de valores Error al recuperar los datos Error al recuperar los datos Error al recuperar los datos Error al recuperar los datos
Yahoo
31 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Make Over a 2.4% One-Month Yield Shorting Nvidia Out-of-the-Money Puts
Nvidia Inc. (NVDA) stock is cheap based on free cash flow (FCF) price targets. Investors can short out-of-the-money (OTM) NVDA put options to make a 1-month 2.4% yield. This is at 5% lower exercise prices, providing a cheaper potential buy-in point for investors. NVDA closed at $143.85 on Friday, June 20. In my last Barchart article on May 30, I argued that NVDA stock was worth $191.34 per share. That is still one-third (+33.0%) higher than Friday's price. The Saturday Spread: Statistical Signals Flash Green for CMG, TMUS and VALE Make Over a 2.4% One-Month Yield Shorting Nvidia Out-of-the-Money Puts Stop Missing Market Moves: Get the FREE Barchart Brief – your midday dose of stock movers, trending sectors, and actionable trade ideas, delivered right to your inbox. Sign Up Now! This article will discuss one way to play NVDA by shorting out-of-the-money (OTM) puts. That way, an investor can set a potentially lower buy-in point and get paid for this. But first, let's look at Nvidia's free cash flow and the related price target. In my last Barchart article, I showed that Nvidia's Q1 FCF of $26.125 billion represented an astounding 59.3% of quarterly revenue. That means almost 60% of its sales revenue goes straight into its bank account with no cash outlays on it (even after record-high capex spending). Moreover, I showed that over the last 12 months (LTM), its FCF margin was almost 50% (48.5%). That implies going forward its FCF could rise to a record high. For example, based on analysts' next 12-month (NTM) projections of $225 billion, using a 50% FCF margin free cash flow could exceed $112 billion: $225b x 50% FCF margin = $112.5b FCF How to value NVDA? Let's think about what the market might be projecting. For example, let's assume the market believes Nvidia will make $100 billion in FCF, slightly less than 4 times its Q1 FCF. So, given its market cap today of $3,508 billion, that represents a 2.85% yield: $100b/$3,508 = 0.0285 = 2.850% FCF yield So, using our NTM forecast of $112.5b, its market cap could rise to $3.75 trillion $112.5b / 0.0285 = $3,947 billion NTM mkt cap That represents an upside of 12.5% from today's market cap: $3,947b / $3,508b mkt cap today = 1.125 So, that makes its target price at least 12.5% more: $143.85 x 1.125 = $161.83 However, if Nvidia makes better than 50% FCF margins over the next year, its target price could be much higher. For example, even a 10% higher FCF margin leads to a 24% upside: 0.55 x $225b = $123.75b FCF $123.75b / 0.0285 FCF yield = $4,342 billion mkt cap; $4,342b / $3,508b = 1.2377 = +23.8% upside 1.1238 x $143.85 p/sh = $178 per share The bottom line is that Nvidia's strong FCF and FCF margins will lead to a significantly higher price, between $162 and $178 per share. This coincides with what other analysts are projecting. For example, 66 analysts surveyed by Yahoo! Finance show an average price target of $172.60. Similarly, Barchart's mean survey shows $174.83 per share. In addition, which tracks analysts who have written recently on NVDA stock, has an average price of $179.87 from 40 analysts. My analysis above shows you why these analysts have these higher price targets. But there is no guarantee NVDA will rise to these targets over the next year. So, one way to play this is to sell short out-of-the-money (OTM) puts in nearby expiry periods. In my May 30 Barchart article, I suggest selling short the $128 strike price put expiring July 3 for a 3.125% yield at a 3.72% out-of-the-money (i.e., below the trading price) strike. For example, the midpoint premium was $4.00, so $4.00/$128.00 equals 0.03125. That was for a one-month play (34 days to expiry or DTE). Today, that strike price has a much lower premium of just 39 cents. So, an investor has already made $3.61 (i.e., $4.00-$0.39), or a net 2.82% yield (i.e., $3.61/$128 = 0.028). It makes sense to roll this over and set a new one-month short-put play. That means buying back the short put at 39 cents and reinvesting at a slightly higher strike price one month out. For example, look at the July 25 expiration period (i.e., 34 DTE). It shows that the $137 strike price put options expiring July 25, i.e., 4.7% below Friday's price, have a $3.40 midpoint premium. That means a new short seller of these puts can make a 2.48% yield over the next month (i.e., $3.40/$137.00 = 0.0248). For less risk-averse investors, a 2.70% yield is possible at the $138 strike price(i.e., $3.72/$138.00 = 0.02696). This strike price is just 4% below Friday's close. Moreover, even after rolling the prior trade over, the net yield with the $137 strike put play is still 2.20% (i.e., $3.40-0.39 = $3.01/$137.00 = 0.02197). So, that means over two months, a short seller of these OTM puts will have made 2.82% plus 2.20%, or 5.02% total (2.51% on average for both months). In addition, an investor's breakeven point, even if NVDA falls to $137.00 over the next month, is lower: $137 - $3.40 = $133.60 p/ sh That is -7.125% below Friday's closing price. In other words, this is a good way to set a lower buy-in point for new investors in NVDA stock. For existing investors, it is a way to potentially lower their average cost, as well as produce extra income on their holdings. And don't forget, given the target price of $172.60, the breakeven point presents a potential upside of over 29%: $172.60/$133.60-1 = 1.292 -1 = +29.2% upside The bottom line is that investors can potentially make over a 2% yield over the next month shorting these out-of-the-money (OTM) puts. On the date of publication, Mark R. Hake, CFA did not have (either directly or indirectly) positions in any of the securities mentioned in this article. All information and data in this article is solely for informational purposes. This article was originally published on Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Wall Street Journal
an hour ago
- Wall Street Journal
What Israel's Soaring Markets Are Saying About the Iran War
Iranian ballistic missiles are raining down on Tel Aviv and Haifa. Israel's main airport is shut. Much of the workforce is moving in and out of bomb shelters. For most countries, such a wartime scenario would send investors fleeing and markets tanking. Yet the opposite is happening. Israeli markets are buoyant, outperforming the world. Israeli stocks, which trade Sunday through Thursday, have been posting solid gains. The TA-125 Index, also known as the Tel Aviv 125 Index, rose for five straight sessions as of the end of last week, even as global markets tread cautiously amid the specter of a prolonged Middle East war. It rallied again on Sunday after the U.S. strikes on Iran's nuclear facilities.
