Mandeep Singh

Yeah.

And look, I mean, based on consensus right now, we are talking about at least a 50% increase in capex or meta next year.

And no one, I think, would mind that given everyone's fees, there will be lift in revenue from AI down the line in the near term.

And

I think they needed some offset because the stock was very expensive on a free cash flow basis.

So this is a nice offset and I think the TPU news was also quite productive in that direction simply because they will be spending close to $50 billion on accelerator chips next year if $110 billion is their CapEx number.

Some portion allocated to TPUs, which cost maybe 25%, 30% cheaper, I think bring down that free cash, like help offset that free cash flow, which is going to be negative next year.

I mean, I like to think of, you know, metaverse ambitions as a moonshot for meta.

And look at, you know, Google's moonshot, for example, like self-driving, Venmo.

That is a lot real then in terms of driving, you know, tangible revenue, top line growth compared to what meta has accomplished with that aggregate, you know, 17 plus billion dollars in spend over the last three, four years.

And to me, it's still a moonshot.

And that's where, you know, paring back and allocating that capital towards, you know,

Probably a more productive use case in AI where they will see some top line lift is the right thing to do.

And I think the year of efficiency that Meta had a few years back may be a repeat, I think, in 2026.

I mean, I would say at this point, virtual reality would be de-emphasized over the glasses, the Ray-Ban glasses, as you said.

And clearly, you know, if they want to distill their model into a smaller version, that would run most likely on the augmented reality glasses.

And that is a much better form factor than the virtual reality where they have been subsidizing the hardware costs, but it really hasn't seen the kind of adoption that they could see with the Ray-Ban glasses, for example.