Let’s see what chatgpt says about our little idea.
>You're investing in one (or more) of these:
>Lithium commodity prices
>Lithium miners
>Battery manufacturers
>The EV ecosystem
>These can behave very differently.
Understandable. I was actually thinking about investing into those companies that try to recycle materials like lithium (I believe they may become more relevant in the future) but honestly I do not have a specific plan for what that means exactly. Does that mean I’d have to invest into a company and if so which one. That’s the question.
> A useful analogy is oil. Global oil consumption increased massively for decades, but that didn't automatically make oil producers fantastic long-term investments.
It’s trying to say that just because we will need more lithium doesn’t mean it’s inherently a good investment. Well, you can see why in the 21-22 boom - the shortage got solved.
>Many commodity booms create wealth for the lowest-cost producers rather than for the commodity itself.
>Suppose lithium prices double:
>High-cost mines become profitable.
>Low-cost mines become extremely profitable.
>Battery manufacturers may actually suffer because input costs rise.
>In that scenario, miners outperform battery companies
Good point I think
>Investors often identify the correct trend but the wrong asset.
>Examples:
>The internet won, but many internet companies failed.
>Airlines transformed travel, but airline stocks were often terrible investments.
>Solar power won, but many solar manufacturers went bankrupt.
Good things to keep in mind.
I actually know so little about investing I didn’t really think of those points.