7 comments

  • StressedDev6 hours ago
    This is not surprising. Hindenburge Research (a short seller) documented SuperMicro’s problems in August 2024 (https://hindenburgresearch.com/smci/).
    • lysace5 hours ago
      I love how Hindenburg Research cleans up the market.

      Is there any public data on how much money they have made, doing so?

    • gamblor9565 hours ago
      On the one had, while I have no reason to disbelieve this specific blog post about Super Micro, I know for a fact that elements of their other posts about other companies are simply wrong, including a number of their claims about Roblox.

      That's the risk with relying on short sellers' reports. Very frequently, the short seller is lying.

      With SuperMicro, the auditor's withdrawal is worth 100x the short sellers' report. This is because it is very common for short sellers to make up claims about a company's financials, but it is very rare for an auditor to voluntarily withdraw.

      • rpcope14 hours ago
        What exactly were they wrong about with regards to Roblox?
      • monero-xmr4 hours ago
        I have heard Roblox is way worse than described. So trust random internet anons however you want
  • anonymousiam6 hours ago
    Less than four months ago there was a lot of hype urging people to buy SMCI. Can anybody really trust the financial news outlets these days?

    https://www.fool.com/investing/2024/07/13/is-super-micro-com...

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/investor-hub/article/is-super-m...

    https://investorplace.com/2024/03/smci-stock-alert-does-this...

    • OrigamiPastrami5 hours ago
      Why do you think you could ever trust them?
    • jprete3 hours ago
      Was the Fool article stealth-updated? It's not particularly positive at the moment.
    • 0x4573 hours ago
      Love that fool.com article includes an up-to-date stock price graph showing the drop.
    • wongarsu5 hours ago
      Betteridge's law of headlines strikes again, even if not all the reporters intended it that way
  • WorkerBee284747 hours ago
    This was also content in today's Money Stuff [0]. Middle section, "Super Micro".

    [0] https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2024-10-30/florid... or https://archive.is/SGhLe

    • Hilift6 hours ago
      Bloomberg was the source that claimed SuperMicro servers were compromised by a grain of rice sized chip that only had two conductor leads on it. https://www.theregister.com/2021/02/12/supermicro_bloomberg_...
      • tivert5 hours ago
        > Bloomberg was the source that claimed SuperMicro servers were compromised by a grain of rice sized chip that only had two conductor leads on it.

        In a similar vein, Bloomberg was the source that Continental and United passenger jets were humping mid-air: https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedairlines/comments/13xq64x/thi....

        ...

        You're talking about this cover, right? https://westoahu.hawaii.edu/cyber/vulnerability-research/did...

        I think you're making the mistake of confusing a cover image for a claim. If you have any experience with magazine cover images, you shouldn't take them that literally, because they're not meant to be.

        • rcxdude3 hours ago
          Well, the biggest problem was that they basically had no details whatsoever in their report, and it was completely unverifiable.
          • Lammy2 hours ago
            I always assumed they were talking about vulnerabilities slipped into BMC firmware or maybe into (counterfeit?) ASPEED BMC chips themselves. If there was one thing an attacker would want to pwn to pwn an entire server, it would be the BMC.

            Verifiable fact: SuperMicro BMC firmwares (really all BMC firmwares from all manufacturers) have and will continue to have exploits: https://www.supermicro.com/en/support/security_BMC_virtual_m...

            Verifiable fact: SuperMicro BMCs' default behavior is to expose itself on the LAN0 port if the dedicated BMC interface has no link: https://www.supermicro.com/manuals/other/IPMI_Users_Guide.pd...

            It's really weird to me how desperate so many people are to shut down any mention of this story instead of adopting a “if it were true, what would it look like?”-and-hope-to-be-wrong approach.

      • mikestew5 hours ago
        …and most notably, never retracted the story.
  • fdlaks4 hours ago
    They used to give out a calendar every year filled with pictures of their executives (mainly CEO) living a lavish lifestyle. Posing with Ferrari's, ribbon cutting ceremonies, stepping onto the company private jet, etc...

    You could always tell when investors or potential customers were in town because the SMCI parking lot would suddenly have brightly colored sports cars parked right out front of the office, only to vanish shortly after until the next high profile meeting.

    I always thought this was strange, but chalked it up to it being a cultural difference on how business is done in Asia vs the USA, but apparently not. GoPro used to do the same thing at their office in San Mateo back when the stock wasn't circling the drain, two Ferrari's parked right outside the front door as you walked into the building. Appearances can often be deceiving I guess.

    • Nasrudith3 minutes ago
      I would call it more stupid than strange. It practically screams "Please eat our lunch with a more lean and efficient company!" when they think bragging about how much money they waste is a good thing.
  • johnklos5 hours ago
    I'm not surprised about this at all. In spite of having plenty of actually decent products and good demand, the company has a history of acting shady and caring more about perceived appearance than about doing the right thing.

    For instance, they appear to care about security issues that publicly embarrass them or that affect huge customers of theirs, issues that'd've been trivial to fix, instead of fixing issues for the sake of fixing them. This kind of "sales" based security and their responses have forced me to encourage multiple companies to use other vendors.

    • tracerbulletx5 hours ago
      That sounds like the majority of companies to me.
    • tasty_freeze4 hours ago
      that'd've

      I know what you mean, but that is the first time I've encountered that contraction in print or even in conversation.

  • arminiusreturns5 hours ago
    Supermicro and Asus are just about the only ones who make the motherboards I need in my COTS on-prem/dc stuff. Why don't more manufacturers target the server x64 market? It's sorely needed. I've built entire systems with SM, but they've long had issues, there just aren't many alternatives in the space.
    • matmatmatmat4 hours ago
      I've wondered this, too. I think the market must just not be big enough to support other players?
    • anonfornoreason5 hours ago
      I moved to gigabyte for epyc builds, they seem to run a bit quicker than super micro on initial launch and product line updates.
  • kjrfghslkdjfl5 hours ago
    [dead]