In short: The short he kept, and the better one: "we've kept a short on BioNTech because we think that the management suite has quit. They don't have nearly the success of MRNA when it comes to cancer vaccines and it just benefited from that small cap squeeze." Sizing has already been managed: "We think that BioNTech could be a better short, which was up 22% for no reason. We did cover half of it. It did fall to like 107 and then it bounced back at the end of the week. We might add to that short again." Restated in the Q&A: "we might short some more BioNTech."
BioNTech is the German biotech best known for the Pfizer Covid vaccine. It rose 22% during the same week — not on any news of its own, but because Moderna's cancer-vaccine result dragged up everything that sounds similar. Singh's phrase is that it was "up 22% for no reason."
He kept this short when he closed the Moderna one, and thinks it is the better of the two. The reasons are company-specific: senior management has been leaving, and BioNTech has nothing like Moderna's success in cancer vaccines. So the shares rose on a resemblance that does not hold — a sympathy move rather than a re-rating.
The position is being managed rather than held rigidly: half was covered when the stock fell to about $107, and it bounced back into the weekend. "We might add to that short again" — the plan is to sell more into any further strength that the fundamentals do not support.
Full passage: premium transcript (PDF).
Nothing matches this filter.
Verbatim excerpts from the public transcripts (auto-pulled at each mention's timestamp, lightly cleaned). Timestamps link into the video; "source page" opens that commentator's full analysis at this row. Click a mention's header line to expand it (one open at a time). For personal study — not investment advice.