summary：
Alright, let's talk about these "forever stocks." I've seen a lot of these "buy and hold f... Alright, let's talk about these "forever stocks." I've seen a lot of these "buy and hold forever" articles floating around, and frankly, the claims are often… optimistic. This one touts Alphabet (GOOGL), Taiwan Semiconductor (TSM), and MercadoLibre (MELI) as sure bets. Leaders in their industries, resilient, blah blah blah. But did they really crush the market? Let’s pull up the numbers and see if the story checks out.
Alphabet's AI "Seamless Integration": More Like a Patch?
The article praises Alphabet's "blowout" third quarter, citing a 16% year-over-year revenue increase to $102 billion and a 33% jump in diluted EPS to $2.87. Not bad. But let's dig a little deeper. That 16% revenue growth? It's decent, sure, but compare it to the previous quarter's 7% growth. Is that a "blowout," or just a natural rebound after a period of slower growth? And that EPS jump? It's impressive, but could be attributed to cost-cutting measures as much as AI innovation.
The author claims Google Search has "seamlessly integrated generative AI." Seamless? I’m not so sure. I've been playing around with their AI search overviews (the SGE, Search Generative Experience), and it feels more like a bolted-on feature than a fundamental overhaul. The latency is noticeable, and the results aren't always… accurate. Is this "seamless integration," or a Band-Aid on a search engine that's starting to show its age?
And here's the part of the report that I find genuinely puzzling: the author brushes aside concerns about the Justice Department's antitrust case, saying the judge "kept Alphabet intact." True, the breakup didn't happen. But the concessions Alphabet did have to make? Those could have long-term impacts on their business model. We're talking about changes to how they display search results, potentially impacting ad revenue. The author glosses over this, and I'm not sure why. Is it because it's harder to quantify than a simple revenue number?
Taiwan Semi: A Safe Bet, or Just a Well-Positioned One?
Taiwan Semiconductor is positioned as an "enviable" company, benefiting from the rising demand for advanced chips. No argument there. The author points to a 41% revenue increase in Q3 to $33.1 billion. Solid. But is that growth sustainable? The chip industry is notoriously cyclical. What happens when demand cools off? And what about geopolitical risk? Taiwan's situation is… complicated, to say the least. The author calls it a "safe gamble," but I'd argue it's more of a calculated one. The risk is there, but the potential reward is also significant.
Here's my methodological critique: The author assumes that "we'll use more advanced chips in greater quantities in the future." I agree, but at what price? Chip manufacturing is incredibly capital-intensive. Taiwan Semi needs to keep investing billions in new fabs to stay ahead of the curve. Will those investments pay off? Or will they end up with excess capacity if demand falters? It's a high-stakes game, and the author makes it sound a little too easy.
MercadoLibre: Amazon of Latin America, or Just a Big Fish in a Smaller Pond?
MercadoLibre is touted as the "Amazon of Latin America," with a dominant position in a vast and growing region. The author acknowledges the threat from Amazon, but dismisses it, saying, "This isn't the first time Amazon has ramped up its Latin American efforts." Okay, but Amazon is a very persistent competitor. And Latin America, while large, is also a complex and fragmented market. Different countries, different regulations, different consumer preferences.
I've looked at hundreds of these filings, and the growth story in Latin America is never as straightforward as it seems on the surface. Currency fluctuations, political instability, and infrastructure challenges can all impact MercadoLibre's bottom line. The author presents it as a simple "betting on the long-term prosperity of an emerging economic region," but it's far more nuanced than that.
A Reality Check
"Crushing the market?" That's a strong claim. And while all three of these companies have solid fundamentals and promising growth prospects, I'm not convinced they're guaranteed to outperform over the long term. The author paints a rosy picture, but it's important to remember that every investment comes with risks. And those risks need to be quantified, not just brushed aside with vague assurances. I've seen similar claims in other articles, such as 3 Stocks to Buy Now and Hold Forever, and it's important to do your own research before investing.