Start Here
What this publication is actually about
Most market narratives don’t fail because demand disappears.
They fail because real systems can’t scale the way models assume.
The Bottom-Up Bulletin focuses on a recurring failure mode: when growth stories outrun physical capacity, capital cycles, balance sheets, or time itself. When that happens, markets misprice risk, often for long stretches, before reality forces a repricing.
The work here is about identifying those mismatches early and following how they resolve.
This is not a one-off thesis
You’ll find individual posts that challenge dominant views but the value isn’t in reading a single argument and moving on.
The same structural mistake shows up repeatedly across sectors:
Energy supply modeled as elastic when it isn’t
AI and data center growth assumed unconstrained by power, equipment, or materials
Infrastructure, services, and incumbents mispriced because installed capacity matters more than optimism
This publication tracks how those gaps evolve over time, not just when they first appear.
Two examples of the framework in practice
If you want concrete examples, start with these:
The Structural Case Against a 2026 U.S. Oil Glut
A bottom-up look at decline rates, DUC exhaustion, and cost inflation and why widely cited supply forecasts rely on assumptions that no longer hold.AI Dreams vs. Supply Chain Realities
An examination of AI and data center growth through the lens of power, transformers, chips, optics, fiber, and materials showing how physical bottlenecks gate timelines long before software ambition does.
Different sectors. Same underlying error.
How to read the work going forward
Posts here generally fall into one of three buckets:
Narrative breaks — where a dominant view rests on assumptions that don’t survive contact with operating data
Constraint mapping — identifying where throughput, capital, or balance sheets become the binding factor
Follow-through — tracking what happens as reality forces behavior changes, not just price changes
You don’t need to agree with every conclusion. The goal is to understand where the models are fragile.
Who this is for
This publication is for readers who:
Care about mechanics, timing, and capital cycles
Are comfortable being early or patient when consensus is confident
Want a framework they can reuse across markets
If that sounds useful, you’re in the right place.