Strategic Market Intelligence Dossier: Manus AI Capital Infusion Post-Meta Divestiture

1. 6-Month Narrative Velocity vs. Exposure Friction

2. Theater of Competition Matrix (90-Day Trajectory)

The deal is handing the AI agent developer fresh capital after Beijing forced Meta to unwind its roughly $2 billion acquisition.

AI startup Manus has successfully raised over $500 million in its first funding round since Meta's acquisition reversal, doubling its valuation to $4 billion.

The deal is handing the AI agent developer fresh capital after Beijing forced Meta to unwind its roughly $2 billion acquisition.

The Manus AI website arranged on a computer in Shanghai, China, on Wednesday, Jan. 7, 2026.

URALLNEWS is empowering you By Fetching Latest News From All Over The World. Bought all facets of latest news and information of each subjects area.

AI startup Manus, whose acquisition by Meta was blocked by the Chinese government, said Thursday it had completed a funding round that raised more than $500 million.Butterfly Effect, the parent company of Manus, said in a statement that the funding round -- the first since its founders and ...

AI agent startup Manus has raised more than $500 million in a fresh funding round, marking its first financing since it separated from Meta and resumed independent operations. The round

- More than $500 million will fund Manus’s first financing since Chinese regulators forced Meta to abandon its acquisition of the AI-agent startup. - Boyu Capital and IDG Capital led the round, with Tencent, HSG and ZhenFund adding follow-on money, signaling investor support for Manus as ...

We still don't have official word on Manus' new valuation, but estimates put it at around $4 billion. This is the first funding round since the Meta-Manus acqusition fell apart.

AI startup Manus, whose acquisition by Meta was blocked by the Chinese government, said Thursday it had completed a funding round that raised more than $500 million.

Oct 8 (Reuters) - Butterfly Effect, the parent company of AI startup Manus, said on Thursday it completed a funding round of more than $500 million as the firm resumed independent operations after

Oct 8 (Reuters) - Butterfly Effect, the parent company of AI startup Manus, said on Thursday it completed a funding round of more than $500 million as the firm resumed independent operations after unwinding Meta’s $2 billion-plus acquisition. The round was co-led by Boyu Capital and IDG Capital, with existing investors Tencent, Sequoia China and ZhenFund also participating. ... • Manus develops general...

Manus, which earlier this year had to break off a merger with Meta, is in discussions to raise $500M at a $4B valuation.

Chinese-founded AI startup Manus is set to double its valuation to $4 billion in its first fundraising since Beijing ordered it to split from Meta Platforms Inc., charting a path to a fresh start after getting caught up in a geopolitical tussle.

The parent company of Manus, the AI agent startup that recently separated from Meta Platforms, said Thursday that it has raised more than $500 million in a new funding round. Butterfly Effect said in a social media post on WeChat that the funding round was led by new investors Boyu Capital ...

Chinese AI-agent startup Manus raised more than $500 million after Chinese regulators blocked Meta’s approximately $2 billion acquisition deal, CNBC reports.

Investing.com -- Chinese-founded AI startup Manus is seeking a valuation of about $4 billion in a planned $500 million funding round, its first financing since its operational split from Meta Platforms, Bloomberg reported on Thursday, citing people familiar with the matter.

Singapore-based artificial intelligence ... blocked a $2 billion acquisition by Meta Platforms. ... Singapore-based artificial intelligence agent developer Manus has secured more than $500 million in fresh capital, marking its first major funding round since Chinese regulators forced ...

Chinese AI startup Manus is reportedly close to completing a $500 million funding round that would double its valuation to $4 billion, making it the…

After unwinding Meta deal, company boosts China team as agent race heats up

A Singapore-based AI startup called Manus has quietly become one of the most talked-about companies in Silicon Valley. It first broke out last spring with a demo video showing an AI agent screening job candidates, planning vacations, and analyzing stock portfolios — and boldly claimed performance better than OpenAI’s Deep Research. Momentum came fast. In April 2025, just weeks after launch, Benchmark led a $75M funding round that valued Manus at $500M post-money, with Benchmark GP Chetan Puttagunta joining the board. Around the same time, Chinese investors including Tencent, ZhenFund, and HSG had already backed the company in an earlier round. Since then, Manus claims explosive traction: millions of users and over $100M in ARR within its first year. For an AI agent company, that’s not just hype — it suggests real usage, repeat value, and enterprise pull. That growth is what reportedly caught the attention of Meta. According to the Wall Street Journal, Meta recently entered negotiations with Manus, highlighting how aggressively big tech is now scouting for agent-native startups rather than just foundation models. The bigger signal here isn’t one deal — it’s the shift. AI agents that act, not just chat, are moving from demos to revenue at record speed. And the line between startups and platform giants is getting thinner by the quarter. #AIStartups #AIAgents #VentureCapital #SiliconValley #GenerativeAI #StartupFunding #TechTrends #ArtificialIntelligence Manus AI Startup Valued at $500M After $75M Funding Round More Relevant Posts Explore related topics Explore content categories

Donations and Chan Zuckerberg Initiative Zuckerberg and his wife Priscilla Chan in May 2013 Zuckerberg founded the Startup:Education foundation. [ 114 ] It was reported in September 2010 that he had donated $100 million ( equivalent to $147,642,301 in 2025 ) to Newark Public Schools , the public school system of Newark, New Jersey . [ 115 ] [ 116 ] Critics noted the timing of the donation as being close to the release of The Social Network , which painted a somewhat negative portrait of Zuckerberg. [ 117 ] Zuckerberg responded to the criticism, saying, "The thing that I was most sensitive about with the movie timing was, I didn't want the press about The Social Network movie to get conflated with the Newark project. I was thinking about doing this anonymously just so that the two things could be kept separate." [ 118 ] Newark Mayor Cory Booker stated that he and New Jersey Governor Chris Christie had to convince Zuckerberg's team not to make the donation anonymously. [ 118 ] The money was largely wasted, according to journalist Dale Russakoff. [ 119 ] [ 120 ] In 2010, Zuckerberg, Bill Gates , and investor Warren Buffett signed The Giving Pledge , in which they said they would donate to charity at least half of their wealth over the course of time, and invited others among the wealthy to donate 50 percent or more of their wealth to charity. [ 121 ] In December 2012, Zuckerberg and his wife Priscilla Chan said that over the course of their lives they would give the majority of their wealth to "advancing human potential and promoting equality" in the spirit of The Giving Pledge. [ 122 ] [ 123 ] In December 2013, Zuckerberg announced a donation of 18 million Facebook shares to the Silicon Valley Community Foundation , to be executed by the end of the month—based on Facebook's valuation as of then, the shares totaled $990 million in value ( equivalent to $1,368,321,429 in 2025 ). Later that month, the donation was recognized as the largest charitable gift on public record for that year. [ 124 ] The Chronicle of Philanthropy placed Zuckerberg and his wife at the top of the magazine's annual list of 50 most generous Americans for 2013, having donated roughly $1 billion to charity ( equivalent to $1,382,142,857 in 2025 ). [ 125 ] In October 2014, Zuckerberg and his wife donated $25 million ( equivalent to $33,999,859 in 2025 ) to combat the Ebola virus disease , specifically the West African Ebola virus epidemic . [ 126 ] [ 127 ] The couple endowed the foundation of the San Francisco General Hospital in February 2015 with $75 million ( equivalent to $101,870,701 in 2025 ), which was the biggest individual donation to a U.S. public hospital. The hospital honored them by renaming itself as The Priscilla Chan and Mark Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital and Trauma Center. Later in 2020, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors passed a near-unanimous, non-binding measure condemning the renaming, citing concerns that a public hospital should not be named after an individual whose social media platform is accused of "endangering public health, spreading misinformation, and violating privacy". [ 128 ] On December 1, 2015, the couple pledged to transfer 99% of their Facebook shares, then valued at $45 billion ( equivalent to $61,122,420,329 in 2025 ), to the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative (CZI). [ 129 ] The funds would not be transferred immediately, but over the course of their lives. [ 130 ] Instead of forming a charitable corporation to donate the value of the stock to, as Bill Gates , Warren Buffett , Larry Page , Sergey Brin and other billionaires have done, Zuckerberg and Chan chose to use the structure of a limited liability company (LLC) . Some journalists and academics have said the CZI conducts philanthrocapitalism . [ 131 ] [ 132 ] [ 133 ] In 2016, CZI gave $600 million ( equivalent to $804,908,486 in 2025 ) to create the tax-exempt charity Chan Zuckerberg Biohub , a collaborative research space in San Francisco's Mission Bay district near the University of California, San Francisco , with the intent to foster interaction and collaboration between scientists at UCSF, University of California, Berkeley , and Stanford University . Intellectual property generated would be jointly owned by Biohub and the discoverer's home institution. Unlike foundations such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation , which open up all research funded to unrestricted access and reuse by the public, Biohub retained the right to commercialize any research it funds. Inventors will have the option of making their discoveries open-source, with permission from Biohub. [ 134 ] [ 135 ] [ 136 ] To increase access to scientific research and promote open science, CZ Biohub requires its investigators and staff scientists to publish submitted manuscripts and related data on preprints servers such as bioRxiv . [ 137 ] [ 138 ] Amidst the COVID-19 pandemic , Zuckerberg announced $25 million ( equivalent to $31,101,324 in 2025 ) in grants to support local journalism that was impacted by the pandemic and $75 million ( equivalent to $93,303,973 in 2025 ) in advertisement purchases in local newspapers by Facebook, Inc. , where Facebook would market itself. [ 139 ]

Stanford Institute for Human-Centered Artificial Intelligence (HAI) Stanford HAI was founded in 2019 by Fei-Fei Li , John Etchemendy , James Landay , and Chris Manning . HAI's mission is to advance AI research that prioritizes human well-being, fostering collaboration across disciplines to ensure AI is developed ethically and inclusively. In its first five years, HAI has directed over $40 million into AI research, supported over 300 scholars, and launched specialized centers like the Stanford Digital Economy Lab and the Center for Research on Foundation Models . The institute has also fostered partnerships with policymakers and industry leaders, advocating for the democratization of AI research. HAI continues to push for new models of collaboration, emphasizing the need for large-scale resources to address the growing complexity of AI systems. [ 50 ] [ 51 ]

Fortune Global 500 From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia The Fortune Global 500 , also known as Global 500 , is an annual ranking of the top 500 corporations worldwide as measured by revenue . [ 1 ] The list is compiled and published annually by Fortune magazine. [ 2 ] It was first published in 1955. [ 3 ] Methodology Until 1989, Global 500 listed only non– United States industrial corporations under the title "International 500" while the Fortune 500 contained and still contains exclusively United States corporations. In 1990, United States companies were added to compile a truly global list of top industrial corporations as ranked by sales. Since 1995, the list has had its current form, listing also top financial corporations and service providers by revenue. Several inconsistencies exist in Fortune ' s ranking of cities with the most Fortune 500 headquarters. On June 3, 2011, the Atlanta Business Chronicle stated examples of Fortune including regional headquarters for some cities, excluding regional headquarters for other cities and in some cases excluding headquarters that are physically located inside a city limit. [ 4 ]

Career Schmidhuber taught there from 2004 until 2009. From 2009 to 2021, he was a professor of artificial intelligence at the Università della Svizzera Italiana in Lugano , Switzerland. [ 12 ] [ 1 ] He has served as the director of Dalle Molle Institute for Artificial Intelligence Research (IDSIA), a Swiss AI lab, since 1995. [ 1 ] Since 2021, he has also been the director of the AI Initiative at the King Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST). [ 4 ] In 2014, Schmidhuber formed a company, NNAISENSE, to work on commercial applications of artificial intelligence in fields such as finance, heavy industry and self-driving cars . Sepp Hochreiter , Jaan Tallinn , and Marcus Hutter are advisers to the company. [ 3 ] Sales were under US$11 million in 2016; however, Schmidhuber states that the current emphasis is on research and not revenue. NNAISENSE raised its first round of capital funding in January 2017. Schmidhuber's overall goal is to create an all-purpose AI by training a single AI in sequence on a variety of narrow tasks, [ 13 ] but as of 2026 he has said that the focus of NNAISENSE has shifted from artificial general intelligence to asset management . [ 14 ]

Here are the 17 US-based AI companies that have raised $100M or more in 2026 Nearly 20 U.S.-based AI startups have raised mega-rounds of $100 million or more in 2026 — and it’s been less than two months. If the first few weeks of 2026 are any indicator, the AI startup market is in for another year of monster funding rounds at eye-watering valuations. U.S. AI startups raised more than $76 billion through mega-rounds in 2025, per TechCrunch’s count. Will startups see the same success in 2026? Time will tell. Here are all the U.S.-based AI startups that have raised $100 million or more thus far: February Simile, which builds AI to mimic human decisions, raised a $100 million Series A round led by Index Ventures. The round was announced on February 12 and included Hanabi Capital, Bain Capital Ventures, and multiple angel investors. Anthropic announced a $30 billion Series G funding round on February 12 that valued the AI research lab at $380 billion. More than 30 investors participated in the round, including Founders Fund, Coatue, and Nvidia, among many others. Media-generation platform Runway raised a $315 million Series E round that valued the company at $5.3 billion. This funding was led by General Atlantic and was announced on February 10. Nvidia, Fidelity, and Felicis also invested, among others. Goodfire, an AI research lab, announced a $150 million Series B round on February 5. B Capital led the round with participation from Juniper Ventures, Lightspeed Venture Partners, and Menlo Ventures. The round valued the company at $1.25 billion. AI research company Fundamental announced a $255 million Series A round on February 5. This round valued the company at $1.4 billion. Investors in the round included Oak HC/FT, Salesforce Ventures, Valor Equity Partners, and QP Ventures, among others. Voice AI company ElevenLabs raised a $500 million Series D round that was announced on February 4. The round was led by Sequoia and valued the company at $11 billion.

Alex Krizhevsky Alex Krizhevsky (born in the Ukraine, raised in Canada) is a computer scientist most noted for his work on artificial neural networks and deep learning. Shortly after having won the ImageNet challenge 2012 through AlexNet, he and his colleagues sold their startup DNN Research Inc. to Google.[1] Krizhevsky left Google in September 2017 when he lost interest in the work.[1] At the company Dessa, Krizhevsky will advise and help research new deep-learning techniques.[1] Many of his numerous papers on machine learning and computer vision are frequently cited by other researchers.[20]

US fund starts $500m spree

2023: Threads, AI and all-time high stock value In 2023, Ireland's Data Protection Commissioner imposed a record EUR 1.2 billion fine on Meta for transferring data from Europe to the United States without adequate protections for EU citizens. [ 85 ] : 250 In March 2023, Meta announced a new round of layoffs that would cut 10,000 employees and close 5,000 open positions to make the company more efficient. [ 86 ] Meta revenue surpassed analyst expectations for the first quarter of 2023 after announcing that it was increasing its focus on AI. [ 87 ] On July 6, Meta launched a new app, Threads , a competitor to Twitter. [ 88 ] Meta announced its artificial intelligence model Llama 2 in July 2023, available for commercial use via partnerships with major cloud providers like Microsoft. It was the first project to be unveiled out of Meta's generative AI group after it was set up in February. It would not charge access or usage but instead operate with a source-available model to allow Meta to ascertain what improvements need to be made. Prior to this announcement, Meta said it had no plans to release Llama 2 for commercial use. An earlier version of Llama was released to academics. [ 89 ] [ 90 ] In August 2023, Meta announced its permanent removal of news content from Facebook and Instagram in Canada due to the Online News Act , which requires Canadian news outlets to be compensated for content shared on its platform. The Online News Act was in effect by year-end, but Meta will not participate in the regulatory process. [ 91 ] In October 2023, Zuckerberg said that AI would be Meta's biggest investment area in 2024. [ 92 ] Meta finished 2023 as one of the best-performing technology stocks of the year, with its share price up 150 percent. [ 93 ] Its stock reached an all-time high in January 2024, bringing Meta within 2% of achieving $1 trillion market capitalization. [ 94 ] In November 2023 Meta Platforms launched an ad-free service in Europe , allowing subscribers to opt-out of personal data being collected for targeted advertising. A group of 28 European organizations, including Max Schrems' advocacy group NOYB , the Irish Council for Civil Liberties , Wikimedia Europe, and the Electronic Privacy Information Center , signed a 2024 letter to the European Data Protection Board (EDPB) expressing concern that this subscriber model would undermine privacy protections, specifically GDPR data protection standards. [ 95 ] Meta removed the Facebook and Instagram accounts of Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei in February 2024, citing repeated violations of its Dangerous Organizations & Individuals policy. [ 96 ] As of March, Meta was under investigation by the FDA for alleged use of its social media platforms to sell illegal drugs. [ 97 ] On 16 May 2024, the European Commission began an investigation into Meta over concerns related to child safety. [ 98 ] [ 99 ] [ 100 ] [ 101 ] In May 2023, Iraqi social media influencer Esaa Ahmed-Adnan encountered a troubling issue when Instagram removed his posts, citing false copyright violations despite his content being original and free from copyrighted material. He discovered that extortionists were behind these takedowns, offering to restore his content for $3,000 or provide ongoing protection for $1,000 per month. This scam, exploiting Meta's rights management tools, became widespread in the Middle East, revealing a gap in Meta's enforcement in developing regions. An Iraqi nonprofit Tech4Peace's founder, Aws al-Saadi helped Ahmed-Adnan and others, but the restoration process was slow, leading to significant financial losses for many victims, including prominent figures like Ammar al-Hakim . This situation highlighted Meta's challenges in balancing global growth with effective content moderation and protection. [ 102 ]

Fortune Global 500 The corporations on our annual list of the world's 500 largest companies combined to generate $43.1 trillion in revenue in 2025, up 3.2% from the previous year. Together, they employ 70.2 million people, and their revenue represents more than one-third of the world’s GDP. The Global 500 earned $3.39 trillion in profit in its most profitable year ever. Amazon topped our annual ranking of the biggest companies in the world by revenue, ending Walmart’s 12-year run. AI chipmakers Nvidia and Taiwan Semiconductor leaped, respectively, 38 spots to No. 28, and 44 spots to No. 82. The semiconductors and electronic components industry's rise also brought Netherlands-based ASML onto the list at No. 453 for the first time. Chinese tech companies Tencent and Alibaba rose, respectively, 19 spots to No. 97 and seven spots to No. 56. But the gains weren’t confined to upstart tech: Health care colossus McKesson, one of 138 companies that have been on the list since 1995, also broke into the top 10, at No. 7.

# EDIT/UPDATE: # New post and research at [https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/1rtd51g/update\_i\_pulled\_irs\_filings\_for\_the\_org\_that/](https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/1rtd51g/update_i_pulled_irs_filings_for_the_org_that/) # Website: [https://tboteproject.com](https://tboteproject.com) Support Findings: [https://tboteproject.com/donate/](https://tboteproject.com/donate/) # Repository: [https://tboteproject.com/git/hekate/attestation-findings](https://tboteproject.com/git/hekate/attestation-findings) I've been pulling public records on the wave of "age verification" bills moving through US state legislatures. IRS 990 filings, Senate lobbying disclosures, state ethics databases, campaign finance records, corporate registries, WHOIS lookups, Wayback Machine archives. What started as curiosity about who was pushing these bills turned into documenting a coordinated influence operation that, from a privacy standpoint, is building surveillance infrastructure at the operating system level while the company behind it faces zero new requirements for its own platforms. I want to be clear about what this is and isn't. I am not the author of [the earlier r/linux post by aaronsb](https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/1rmhxk1/i_pulled_the_actual_bill_text_from_5_state_age/) and I'm not affiliated with them. I titled this to draw attention on this subreddit because the privacy implications go well beyond Linux. Every source cited here is a public record. # What the bills actually require you to hand over Most reporting on these bills says something vague like "age checks at device setup." The statutory language is more specific and more invasive than that. California AB-1043, signed October 2025 and effective January 1, 2027, defines "Operating system provider" under Section 1798.500(g) as "a person or entity that develops, licenses, or controls the operating system software on a computer, mobile device, or any other general purpose computing device." Every OS provider must then: provide an interface at account setup collecting a birth date or age, and expose a real-time API that broadcasts the user's age bracket (under 13, 13 to 15, 16 to 17, 18+) to any application running on the system. Read that again. Every app on your device gets to query a system-level API that returns your age bracket in real time. This isn't age verification at the point of accessing restricted content. This is a persistent age-broadcasting service baked into the operating system itself, queryable by every installed application. Colorado SB26-051 (passed the Senate 28-7, now in the House) copies the same definitions in the same order, same penalty structure ($2,500 per child for negligent violations, $7,500 for intentional ones), same exemptions. The template is the ICMEC "Digital Age Assurance Act," and it's been introduced or is pending in Illinois (three separate bills), New York, Kansas, South Carolina, Ohio, Georgia, Florida, and at the federal level. New York's S8102A goes further. It requires device manufacturers to perform "commercially reasonable and technically feasible age assurance" at device activation and explicitly bans self-reporting. The AG picks the approved methods. That means biometric age estimation or government ID verification before you can use a device you purchased. Exemptions in all of these bills cover broadband ISPs, telecom services, and physical products. None contain any exemption for open-source software, non-commercial projects, or privacy-preserving verification methods. The status right now: |State|Bill|Status| |:-|:-|:-| |CA|AB-1043|Enacted, effective Jan 1, 2027| |CO|SB26-051|Passed Senate, in House committee| |LA|HB-570|Enacted, effective July 1, 2026| |UT|SB-142|Enacted, first in nation| |TX|SB-2420|Enjoined by federal judge| |NY|S8102A|Pending| |IL|HB-3304, HB-4140, SB-2037|Pending| |Federal|KOSA, ASAA|Pending| # The privacy architecture these bills create What's concerning about these bills is they don't just verify age once. They create persistent identity layer inside the operating system that applications can query at will. The commercial age verification vendors who would provide this infrastructure (Yoti, Veriff, Jumio) charge $0.10 to $2.00 per check, require proprietary SDKs, demand API keys tied to commercial accounts, and operate cloud-only with no self-hosted option. Your age verification data goes to a third-party cloud service. Every time. Compare this to what the EU built. The EU Digital Identity Wallet under eIDAS 2.0 has a reference implementation published under Apache 2.0/EUPL and uses selective disclosure credentials. A user can prove they fall within an age bracket without handing over their date of birth. The EU's Digital Services Act puts age verification obligations on **Very Large Online Platforms** (45M+ monthly users), not on operating systems. FOSS projects that don't act as intermediary services are explicitly outside scope. Micro and small enterprises get additional exemptions. **The EU approach is not without its own problems**. The reference code is *open*, but the operational system is not self-hostable. You cannot run your own trusted identity provider. The wallet apps require Google Play Services or the iOS equivalent, which locks out users of privacy-focused Android distributions like GrapheneOS, CalyxOS, and LineageOS. Device attestation requirements effectively ban rooted or jailbroken devices. The zero-knowledge proof privacy guarantees only hold if you trust that credential issuers and verifiers are not colluding to correlate your activity. ZKP is a cryptographic mechanism, not a trust architecture, and it cannot solve the problem of collusion between parties in the chain. Even with those caveats, the architectural gap between the two approaches is wide. The EU model does not create a persistent age-broadcasting API at the OS level. It does not mandate commercial vendors. It does not force biometric data into a third-party cloud on every check. The US bills assume every operating system is built by a corporation with the infrastructure and revenue to absorb these costs. The EU started from the opposite assumption and built accordingly. |EU approach|US bills| |:-|:-| |Who's regulated|Platforms with 45M+ users| |FOSS exemption|Yes, five separate mechanisms| |Verification method|Open-source wallet, zero-knowledge proofs| |Cost to non-commercial projects|$0| |Privacy architecture|Selective disclosure, privacy by design| |Works offline|Yes| # Who wrote the legislation This is where it gets interesting. Rep. Kim Carver (R-Bossier City), the sponsor of Louisiana's HB-570, publicly confirmed that a Meta lobbyist brought the legislative language directly to her. The bill as drafted required only app stores (Apple, Google) to verify user ages. It did not require social media platforms to do anything. Meta deployed 12 lobbyists across 9 confirmed firms for this single bill, paying at least $324,992 (described as a "very conservative estimate"). The confirmed firms include Pelican State Partners (who also lobby for Roblox, letting Meta frame this as "broad industry support" rather than one company's project), Adams and Reese LLP (the #1 ranked Louisiana government affairs firm), and State Capitol Solutions. Nicole Lopez, Meta's Director of Global Litigation Strategy for Youth, testified at the House Commerce Committee in support. She also testified in South Dakota for a similar bill. She's Meta's national point person for these laws. HB-570 passed unanimously at every stage: House 99-0, Senate 39-0. So why did Meta need 12 lobbyists? Because the votes were never the concern. The lobbyists were there to control the text and block amendments. The key amendment battle came from Senator Jay Morris, who expanded the bill to include app developers alongside app stores after Google's senior director of government affairs publicly questioned why "Mark Zuckerberg is so keen on passing these bills." When Morris introduced his amendment, Meta went silent. The conference committee compromise maintained dual responsibility but kept the primary burden on app stores, which is what Meta wanted from the start. At that same Senate hearing, Morris directly questioned DCA Executive Director Casey Stefanski about who funds her organization. She reportedly deflected, said she "wasn't comfortable answering," then under continued pressure admitted tech companies provide funding but refused to name them. # The advocacy group that doesn't legally exist The Digital Childhood Alliance presents itself as a coalition of 50+ conservative child safety organizations (later inflated to 140+, though only six have ever been publicly named). It has been testifying in favor of these bills across states. Here is what public records show about its legal status: I searched all four regional extracts of the IRS Exempt Organizations Business Master File (eo1 through eo4.csv), which cover every tax-exempt organization registered in the United States. DCA is not there. No EIN exists for this organization. I also searched for incorporation records in Colorado, DC, Delaware, and Virginia, plus OpenCorporates (200M+ companies), ProPublica Nonprofit Explorer, GuideStar, and Charity Navigator. No incorporation record exists in any of them. DCA's domain was registered December 18, 2024 through GoDaddy with privacy protection and a four-year registration. The website was live and fully formed one day later: professional design, statistics, testimonials from Heritage Foundation and NCOSE staff, ASAA talking points already loaded. This is not a grassroots launch. This is a staging deployment of a pre-built site. 77 days later, Utah SB-142 became the first ASAA law signed in the country. DCA processes donations through For Good (formerly Network for Good, EIN 68-0480736), which is a Donor Advised Fund. For Good explicitly states in its documentation that it serves "501(c)(3) nonprofit organizations." DCA claims 501(c)(4) status. DCA is classified as a "Project" (ID 258136) in the For Good system, not as a standalone nonprofit. I searched all 59,736 For Good grant recipients across five years, roughly $1.73 billion in disbursements. Zero grants to DCA, DCI, NCOSE, or any related entity. The donation page appears to be cosmetic. Bloomberg reporters exposed Meta as a DCA funder in July 2025. The Deseret News detailed the arrangement in December 2025. No version of the website, across 100+ Wayback Machine snapshots, has ever disclosed funding sources. Every blog post and testimony targets Apple and Google. Meta is never mentioned or criticized. DCA's leadership traces directly to NCOSE (National Center on Sexual Exploitation): Casey Stefanski, Executive Director, spent 10 years at NCOSE as Senior Director of Global Partnerships. Unusually, she never appears on any NCOSE 990 filing as an officer, key employee, or among the five highest-compensated staff. A senior director title at a $5.4M organization for a decade with no 990 appearance suggests either below-threshold compensation, an inflated title, or something else about the arrangement. Dawn Hawkins, DCA's Chair, simultaneously serves as CEO of NCOSE. John Read, DCA's Senior Policy Advisor, spent 30 years at the DOJ Antitrust Division investigating app stores and Big Tech. NCOSE's own 501(c)(4) structure turns out to be complicated. Tracing Schedule R filings across four years reveals that NCOSE created "NCOSE Action" (EIN 86-2458921) as a c4 in 2021, reclassified it from c4 to c3 in 2022, then created an entirely new c4 called "Institute for Public Policy" (EIN 88-1180705) in 2023 with the same address and the same principal officer (Marcel van der Watt). By 2024 the original entity had disappeared from Schedule R entirely. Despite NCOSE's website describing NCOSEAction as "created by NCOSE," and Schedule R listing the Institute as a "controlled organization," all 19 transaction indicators between NCOSE and the Institute are marked "No." No grants, no shared employees, no shared facilities, no reimbursements. Zero reported transactions between a parent and its own controlled c4 while staff move freely between them. Concurrently, NCOSE's lobbying spending tripled from $78,000 to $204,000, coinciding with DCA's launch and the ASAA legislative push. $70M+ in super PACs, deliberately fragmented Meta poured over $70 million into state-level super PACs and structured every one to avoid the FEC's centralized, searchable database: |Entity|Meta's contribution|Type|Notable detail| |:-|:-|:-|:-| |ATEP|$45M|Bipartisan 527 PAC|Co-led by Hilltop Public Solutions| |META California|$20M|State PAC|Chaired by Brian Rice, Meta VP of Public Policy| |California Leads|$5M|State PAC|Union-partnered| |Forge the Future|Downstream from ATEP|State PAC (TX)|Policy priorities mirror ASAA language| |Making Our Tomorrow|Downstream from ATEP|State PAC (IL)|Also chaired by Brian Rice| By registering every PAC at the state level rather than federally, Meta scatters filings across dozens of state ethics commission databases with different formats, different disclosure timelines, and no centralized search. Each filing is technically public. Aggregating them into a coherent picture requires manually querying each state. This is structural opacity by fragmentation. Forge the Future's stated policy priorities include: "Empowering parents with oversight of children's online activities across devices and digital environments." That is functionally identical to the ASAA framing. Of 20 Meta-backed candidates across Texas and North Carolina primaries, 19 won (Washington Post, March 12, 2026). # The firm that bridges both tracks This is the finding that connects two things I'd been tracking separately. Hilltop Public Solutions, a Democratic consulting firm, shows up in three distinct contexts: 1. Co-leads ATEP, Meta's $45M bipartisan super PAC 2. Involved in DCA's messaging coordination, per investigative reporting 3. Connected to Forge the Future, the downstream Texas PAC with ASAA-aligned policy priorities This makes Hilltop the first confirmed entity bridging Meta's political spending operation and the DCA advocacy campaign. The firm helping Meta elect "tech-friendly" state legislators also coordinates messaging for the nominally independent grassroots organization pushing those legislators to pass ASAA. # The dark money network Meta's Colorado lobbying runs through Headwaters Strategies, paid $338,500 since 2019, with monthly payments jumping from roughly $5K/month to $14K-$30K/month starting July 2023 as state-level age verification bills accelerated. Headwaters co-founder Adam Eichberg simultaneously serves as a registered Meta lobbyist in Colorado, as Chair of the Board of the New Venture Fund (the flagship entity of the Arabella Advisors network, $669M revenue), and as founding board member of the Windward Fund (another Arabella entity, $311M revenue). The Arabella network operates four entities from the same building at 1828 L Street NW, Washington DC, with combined annual revenue exceeding $1.3 billion. NVF transfers $121.3M per year to the Sixteen Thirty Fund, a 501(c)(4) with no donor disclosure requirements. I parsed the IRS Form 990 Schedule I filings across all five Arabella entities. That's 4,433 grants totaling approximately $2.0 billion. I searched for every child safety, age verification, and tech policy organization I could identify. Zero matches. The Schedule I grant pathway is definitively ruled out. If Meta money flows through this network, it would have to travel via fiscal sponsorship, consulting fees, or non-grant payments, which are inherently less transparent. The Eichberg connection matters not because it proves a pipeline, but because the person receiving Meta's lobbying payments chairs the governance structure of the largest anonymous-donor-funded advocacy network in US politics. That structural overlap is documented regardless of whether money moves through it. # The company that benefits Meta's own Horizon OS (powering Quest VR headsets) already has Meta Account age verification, a Get Age Category API, Family Center parental controls, Quest Store age ratings, and default minor account protections. I scored Horizon OS at 83% compliance readiness with these mandates. Meta is not opposing these bills. In Colorado, I pulled lobbying records from the Secretary of State's SODA API and found Meta's four registered lobbyists on SB26-051 listed in a "Monitoring" position. Not amending, not opposing. Watching. On every social media regulation bill in Colorado, Meta takes an "Amending" position, actively fighting changes. Across 117 lobbying records on 22 bills: * Bills regulating social media: Meta position is "Amending" (fighting) * The one bill putting the burden on OS providers: Meta position is "Monitoring" (watching) Meta fights bills that regulate Meta. Meta watches bills that regulate everyone else. In California, Meta spent over $1 million on state lobbying in the first three quarters of 2025 and publicly supported AB-1043, breaking ranks with its own trade associations (TechNet and Chamber of Progress both opposed it). Meta supported a bill that creates surveillance infrastructure at the OS level while leaving social media platforms untouched. Meta's LD-2 filings with the Senate explicitly list H.R. 3149/S. 1586, the App Store Accountability Act, as a lobbied bill. The filing narrative includes "protecting children, bullying prevention and online safety; youth safety and federal parental approval; youth restrictions on social media." In the same filing, Meta also lobbies on KOSA and COPPA 2.0, which would regulate Meta directly. Meta supports the bill that burdens its competitors and lobbies to weaken the bills that burden itself. Both positions appear in the same quarterly disclosure. # The privacy questions I've tried to present findings here, not conclusions. But from a privacy standpoint: Why does the company that profits from collecting user data draft legislation requiring every operating system to collect age data and broadcast it to every installed application via a system-level API? Why do these bills mandate commercial age verification vendors (Yoti, Veriff, Jumio) whose business model is collecting biometric data, while the EU's equivalent uses open-source zero-knowledge proofs that reveal nothing beyond "over 18"? Why is there no data minimization requirement in any of these bills for the age verification data itself? AB-1043 creates a persistent age signal API. Who governs what happens to the data flowing through it? Why does Meta fund an advocacy group with no legal existence in the IRS system to push legislation that creates new data collection infrastructure at a layer below Meta's own products, while Meta faces zero new requirements? Why does the company whose lobbyist drafted one of these bills write it to specifically exclude social media platforms from the age verification mandate? If the goal is child safety, why regulate the operating system, which has no direct contact with children, instead of the social media platforms where the documented harm occurs? # What you can do If you're in CO, IL, or NY, these bills are still in committee. Comment on the record. System76's CEO met with the Colorado bill's sponsor on March 9 and the sponsor suggested excluding open-source software. The conversation is happening now. Contact the EFF, FSF, and Software Freedom Conservancy with the specific statutory language and compliance gap numbers. They need to know these definitions cover volunteer-maintained software with no exemption. Read the actual bill text. CA AB-1043 is searchable on leginfo.legislature.ca.gov. CO SB26-051 is on leg.colorado.gov. The definitions are what matter, not the news summaries. If you maintain software that could be classified as an "operating system provider" under these definitions, start thinking about your response now. CA AB-1043 takes effect January 1, 2027. Louisiana HB-570 takes effect July 1, 2026. # Sources (all public records) **Bill text:** CA AB-1043 (Chapter 675, leginfo.legislature.ca.gov), CO SB26-051 (leg.colorado.gov), LA HB-570 Act 481 of 2025 (legis.la.gov), NY S8102A (nysenate.gov), TX SB-2420, UT SB-142 (le.utah.gov) **Federal lobbying:** OpenSecrets Meta profile (opensecrets.org, client ID D000033563), Senate LDA filing UUID b73445ed-15e5-42e7-a1e8-aeb224755267 **Colorado lobbying:** CO Secretary of State SODA API (data.colorado.gov, datasets vp65-spyn, dxfk-9ifj, df5p-p6jt) **Louisiana lobbying:** LA Board of Ethics, F Minus database (fminus.org/clients/pelican-state-partners-llc/, fminus.org/clients/meta-platforms-inc/) **California lobbying:** CalAccess (cal-access.sos.ca.gov), Bloomberg Government **Super PACs:** Forge the Future (texasforgefuturepac.com), Texas Ethics Commission, Illinois State Board of Elections, Politico (Feb 2, 2026), Washington Post (Mar 12, 2026) **DCA records:** WHOIS/RDAP (rdap.org), Wayback Machine CDX API (100+ snapshots), IRS EO BMF (eo1-eo4.csv), OpenCorporates, ProPublica, GuideStar **NCOSE:** IRS Form 990 FY2020-FY2024 including Schedule R; NCOSEAction/Institute for Public Policy (EIN 88-1180705); original NCOSE Action (EIN 86-2458921) via Schedule R history **For Good/Network for Good:** [forgood.org](http://forgood.org), DCA donation page source (targetable\_type=Project, targetable\_id=258136), For Good 990s via ProPublica (EIN 68-0480736, 59,736 recipients searched) **IRS 990 filings:** ProPublica Nonprofit Explorer: NVF (EIN 20-5806345), STF 2024 (sixteenthirtyfund.org), DCI (EIN 39-3684798), Windward, Hopewell, North Fund, NCOSE (EIN 13-2608326), ConnectSafely (EIN 47-3168168) **Campaign finance:** CO TRACER bulk data (tracer.sos.colorado.gov), FollowTheMoney.org, FEC API (Meta PAC C00502906) **Reporting:** Bloomberg (July 2025), Deseret News (Dec 2025), The Center Square, ACT | The App Association, Dome Politics, Pluribus News, [Nola.com](http://Nola.com), Privacy Daily **EU framework:** EUR-Lex (Digital Services Act, eIDAS 2.0 Regulation), EUDIW GitHub repository, T-Scy consortium **Technical:** freedesktop.org, GNOME/KDE documentation, Meta developer docs (developer.meta.com/horizon) # Full dataset, OSINT tasklist, and all processed findings are published with sources embedded in each file: [github.com/upper-up/meta-lobbying-and-other-findings](https://github.com/upper-up/meta-lobbying-and-other-findings) This is an ongoing investigation. Pending: Texas Ethics Commission records for Forge the Future expenditure recipients, NCOSEAction's first 990 filing, IRS Form 8872 for ATEP, and FOIA responses from Colorado and Louisiana. If you have access to lobbying data from states I haven't covered (IL, NY, UT, GA), I'd appreciate a heads up. I am not claiming Meta wrote every one of these bills. Louisiana is confirmed by the sponsor; the others use a shared ICMEC template. I am not claiming there is a direct Arabella-to-DCA funding pipeline; I checked $2 billion in grants and found no evidence. I am not claiming child safety isn't a legitimate concern. What I am documenting is: the company whose lobbyist drafted HB-570 wrote it to exclude its own platforms; the advocacy group pushing these bills nationally has no legal existence and is confirmed funded by Meta; the same consulting firm bridges Meta's super PAC and DCA's messaging; none of these bills exempt open-source or non-commercial software while the EU equivalent does; and the mandatory age-signal API creates persistent surveillance infrastructure at the OS level with no data minimization requirements. The records are above. Draw your own conclusions. This section documents what happened when this investigation was posted to Reddit, and provides context on Meta's documented history of using astroturfing, coordinated reporting, and platform manipulation to suppress unfavorable content. # What happened The original version of this investigation was posted to r/linux, where it was mass reported and pulled down pending moderator review **(150 upvotes, roughly 15k views before being pulled down some 40 minutes after being posted)** The content that was suppressed names Meta lobbying firms, traces documented payments, cites Senate LD-2 filings, and links to IRS records. It identifies Hilltop Public Solutions as the first confirmed entity bridging Meta's $45M super PAC and the DCA astroturf campaign. This is the kind of content that a well-resourced actor would have reason to suppress. I cannot prove the mass reports were coordinated rather than organic. That is the point of the tactic: Reddit's infrastructure makes it impossible to distinguish genuine community objections from manufactured ones, and it rewards the behavior either way by automatically removing the content. # Meta has done this before In March 2022, the Washington Post reported that Meta hired Targeted Victory, one of the largest Republican consulting firms in the country, to run a nationwide astroturfing campaign against TikTok. Internal emails obtained by the Post showed the campaign: * Placed op-eds and letters to the editor in regional news outlets across the country, none of which disclosed the connection to Meta or Targeted Victory * Promoted stories about dangerous TikTok "trends" that had actually originated on Facebook * Pushed local politicians and political reporters to frame TikTok as a threat to children * In an internal email, a campaign director wrote that the "dream would be to get stories with headlines like 'From dances to danger: how TikTok has become the most harmful social media space for kids'" Meta's spokesman defended the campaign by saying "all platforms should face a level of scrutiny consistent with their growing success." Meta did not deny hiring the firm or directing the campaign. The story was confirmed by the Washington Post, Fortune, Variety, CBS News, Engadget, Tortoise Media, the Boston Globe, and Techdirt, among others. This is not speculation about what Meta might do. This is what Meta has been publicly documented doing: hiring firms to plant stories, manufacture public concern about competitors using child safety as the framing, and conceal the corporate origin of the messaging. The Targeted Victory campaign and the DCA campaign use the same playbook: fund an outside entity to push messaging that serves Meta's commercial interests while hiding Meta's involvement. # Reddit's bot and astroturfing problem is structural Research published in Nature (Scientific Reports) documented coordinated political astroturfing patterns across platforms including Reddit. A separate study found that at least 15% of content in surveyed subreddits was posted by corporate trolls or bot accounts designed to manipulate public opinion. Since June 2025, bot networks have been systematically exploiting Reddit and Meta's own moderation systems through mass reporting. Thousands of legitimate Facebook groups were deleted after coordinated bot reports triggered automated enforcement. The same mass-reporting tactic works on Reddit: a small number of accounts can file reports, trigger automated removal, and flag the poster's account for site-wide spam filtering, all without engaging with the content. Venture-backed firms like Doublespeed now offer astroturfing-as-a-service across Reddit, TikTok, and Instagram, operating physical phone farms to bypass platform detection. The infrastructure for suppressing content through coordinated inauthentic behavior is commercially available. # What this means for this investigation Meta spent $26.3 million on federal lobbying in 2025 and deployed 86+ lobbyists across 45 states. It funded a nationally active advocacy group (DCA) with no legal existence in the IRS system. It hired Hilltop Public Solutions to simultaneously run its $45M super PAC and coordinate DCA's messaging. It previously hired Targeted Victory to run a covert astroturfing campaign against TikTok using child safety as the narrative frame. This investigation documents all of that with primary sources. A post containing those findings was mass reported on Reddit within hours and suppressed site-wide by automated systems. Whether the reports were organic or coordinated, the outcome is the same: the content was removed from the platform where Meta has both the motive and the documented capability to suppress it. The research is published in a git repository with every source embedded. It does not depend on Reddit's infrastructure to survive. # Sources * Washington Post, "Facebook paid Republican strategy firm to malign TikTok" (March 30, 2022): [https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/03/30/facebook-tiktok-targeted-victory/](https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/03/30/facebook-tiktok-targeted-victory/) * Fortune, "Meta paid a Republican consulting firm to turn the public against TikTok" (March 31, 2022): [https://fortune.com/2022/03/31/facebook-meta-paid-republican-consulting-firm-targeted-victory-turn-public-opinion-against-tiktok/](https://fortune.com/2022/03/31/facebook-meta-paid-republican-consulting-firm-targeted-victory-turn-public-opinion-against-tiktok/) * Variety, "Facebook Parent Company Defends Its PR Campaign to Portray TikTok as Threat to American Children" (March 31, 2022): [https://variety.com/2022/digital/news/meta-facebook-tiktok-pr-campaign-1235218866/](https://variety.com/2022/digital/news/meta-facebook-tiktok-pr-campaign-1235218866/) * Techdirt, "Facebook-Hired PR Firm Coordinated Anti-TikTok Campaign To Spread Bogus Moral Panics" (March 31, 2022): [https://www.techdirt.com/2022/03/31/facebook-hired-pr-firm-coordinated-anti-tiktok-campaign-to-spread-bogus-moral-panics/](https://www.techdirt.com/2022/03/31/facebook-hired-pr-firm-coordinated-anti-tiktok-campaign-to-spread-bogus-moral-panics/) * Tortoise Media, "Meta 'astroturfed' TikTok" (April 5, 2022): [https://www.tortoisemedia.com/2022/04/05/meta-astroturfed-tiktok](https://www.tortoisemedia.com/2022/04/05/meta-astroturfed-tiktok) * CBS News, "Report: Facebook Hired PR Firm To Smear TikTok": [https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/report-facebook-hired-pr-firm-to-smear-tiktok/](https://www.cbsnews.com/sanfrancisco/news/report-facebook-hired-pr-firm-to-smear-tiktok/) * Engadget, "Meta reportedly paid political consultants to smear TikTok": [https://www.engadget.com/meta-targeted-victory-tiktok-smear-campaign-133139892.html](https://www.engadget.com/meta-targeted-victory-tiktok-smear-campaign-133139892.html) * Boston Globe, "Facebook paid GOP firm to malign TikTok, internal e-mails reveal" (March 30, 2022): [https://www.bostonglobe.com/2022/03/30/business/facebook-paid-gop-firm-malign-tiktok-internal-e-mails-reveal/](https://www.bostonglobe.com/2022/03/30/business/facebook-paid-gop-firm-malign-tiktok-internal-e-mails-reveal/) * Georgetown Free Speech Project, "Facebook hires GOP consulting firm to smear rival TikTok": [https://freespeechproject.georgetown.edu/tracker-entries/facebook-hires-gop-consulting-firm-in-dc-area-to-smear-rival-tiktok/](https://freespeechproject.georgetown.edu/tracker-entries/facebook-hires-gop-consulting-firm-in-dc-area-to-smear-rival-tiktok/) * Nature Scientific Reports, "Coordination patterns reveal online political astroturfing across the world" (2022): [https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-022-08404-9](https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-022-08404-9) * Medium/HR News, "Study: At Least 15% of All Reddit Content is Corporate Trolls": [https://medium.com/@hrnews1/study-at-least-15-of-all-reddit-content-is-corporate-trolls-trying-to-manipulate-public-opinion-49cb302c26a5](https://medium.com/@hrnews1/study-at-least-15-of-all-reddit-content-is-corporate-trolls-trying-to-manipulate-public-opinion-49cb302c26a5) * TechCrunch, "Facebook Group admins complain of mass bans" (June 24, 2025): [https://techcrunch.com/2025/06/24/facebook-group-admins-complain-of-mass-bans-meta-says-its-fixing-the-problem/](https://techcrunch.com/2025/06/24/facebook-group-admins-complain-of-mass-bans-meta-says-its-fixing-the-problem/) * YNet News, "Public opinion for sale: The new startup causing a storm" (Doublespeed): [https://www.ynetnews.com/tech-and-digital/article/hyraenbmzx](https://www.ynetnews.com/tech-and-digital/article/hyraenbmzx) * Meta Transparency Center, "Inauthentic Behavior" policy: [https://transparency.meta.com/policies/community-standards/inauthentic-behavior/](https://transparency.meta.com/policies/community-standards/inauthentic-behavior/) * The Hacker News, "Meta Disrupts Influence Ops Targeting Romania, Azerbaijan, and Taiwan" (May 2025): [https://thehackernews.com/2025/05/meta-disrupts-influence-ops-targeting.html](https://thehackernews.com/2025/05/meta-disrupts-influence-ops-targeting.html)

**I am not The OOP, OOP is u/throawaylatechild** **(MA) late brother's partner suing family for Money** **Originally posted to r/legaladvice** **TRIGGER WARNING:** >!homophobia, theft, loss of a loved one, mentions death threats!< **MOOD SPOILER:** >!Outrageous!< [Original Post](https://web.archive.org/web/20180809220052/https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/comments/95c289/ma_late_brothers_partner_suing_family_for_money/) **Aug 7, 2018** Our brother age 34M died of cancer 9 months ago. He was very successful and left behind money and assets. He also had a Will. My brother was also in a gay relationship for 8 years with a 28M partner. Our family is religious and yes we may not have approved the relationship we still loved our brother. He unfortunately died of cancer and left a will. Left most of the money to his gay partner. They weren't even married. We decided money to be kept within the family and but gave his partner some money. We also paid for brothers funeral and medical Bill's. We thought that was the end of it. But now his ex partner is suing us for the rest of the funds. I don't know how he got hold of the will. My family is still grieving and now this man wants to take us to court. Trying to see how to solve this without involving the court. Thank you for your advice **ADDITIONAL INFO/COMMENTS FROM OOP** **[deleted]** >How did you even get access to the estate? Was one of you the executor? **OOP** >>Yes my little sister who he trusted the most was. Since assets and business were mostly through the family he left most to us. He however left his partner his condo cars and 85% of the money. Which we thought was not fair **~** **Commenter** > Who cares if they weren't married? His will directed his estate to a person who isn't you. Why did you think it was a good idea for you to not honor it? And how were you able to access the funds that were left behind? > > It's possible that you and your family have significant civil and maybe criminal liability here. You all need to consult with a probate attorney. **OOP** >>My sister was in charge of the will, according to his partner he did not want to be in charge because ' he didn't want to deal with us' 'he hates us' so my sister who was best friends with my brother acted as the middle ground for us and his partner. We were shocked when we read the will. We didn't expect it to be that unfair. I am trying to make it right **Commenter 2** >>> That's generally the response to halfwits who rob you, yes. >>> >>> You make this right by giving him everything he's owed according to the will and asking him very, very nicely not to sue you or file a police report. **OOP** >>>>You are right. And this is what am trying to do. Most of the family previously sent his insulting messages throughout his relationship with my brother. Trying to make it right and hopefully we don't go to court. **~** **Commenter** > If he’s suing you, then the court is already involved. > > Edit: just to be clear: you disregarded his will? If so you deserve to be sued **Commenter 2** >> So, things you can worry about: >> >> 1. To be sued for the value of everything that was detailed to him in the will. You will almost certainly lose. >> >> 2. Punitive damages. Don't be surprised if they go for triple. >> >> 3. You'll be on the hook for attorney's fees. >> >> 4. If the value was >$1200, then the sister could, in theory, be charged with felony theft/conversion and/or contempt of the probate court. That would also come with fees and possible jail time. >> >> The real question is who the court will force to repay the money. The person with the most exposure is the sister, as the executor. She's looking at a complete and total wipeout, and she cannot discharge that debt in bankruptcy. She can expect wages to be garnished, tax refunds and lottery winnings to be garnished, her credit to be trashed, and if she is charged with anything, severely limited future employment prospects. **OOP** >>>OMG, we didn't know it could be this serious. It is all my fault, I convinced my sister to do what the family wanted. We didn't know and are shocked that his boyfriend would sue us. I am going to have a family meeting with friends and try to come up with as much money as I can. Omg am very nervous and didn't realize how horrible this could get. Thank you for the advice. **~** **Commenter** > Uh, you stole his money that was left to him. You had no right to override your brother's will, and you had no right to use any of that money on a funeral unless it was stated in the will. > > The judge is going to throw the book at you people and I'll be scanning the MA news just to enjoy reading about the verdict. **OOP** >>We are trying to make it right. Most of his money he made we helped support him with his business. My parents raised him and paid for his school, dont they deserve that money more than his so called friend? They weren't even married let alone engaged. **~** **Commenter** >What's fair is honoring your late brother's wishes. Better start fundraising the funds back because there's not a "we didn't approve of his will and decided family should have it instead" probate option. **OOP** >>Wish it was simple for me to cut him a check. Funds are around 850K. I am reading the replies and this seems more serious than we thought. **Commenter** >>> Wait, you guys still almost a million dollars without consulting a legal professional, and now you're posting on Reddit like this is going to small claims court? >>> >>> Clearly all the brains in your family died with your brother. >>> >>> I don't think you're really grasping the enormity of the crime you've admitted to on here. But I can't wait to see this in the papers, this is gonna be good. Not for you though. **Why they thought they were entitled to the money** >Yeah you are mostly right, but we had no issue with him getting inheritance, we just didn't think he deserved all the money he got. Especially because we paid for most of the things connected to my brother.. **And what happened to the money?** **OOP** >We are a big family, most of the money was distributed throughout family members which we thought was only fair. We cant pay the full amount because the money is mostly gone **Update 1/Same Post - Same day** Update: thank you all for the advice and yes I am very stupid for not realizing how serious this was from the beginning. I am having a family meeting and we will figure out a way to up with money so my we dont make things worse with the law. My brother left us some properties so I will make sure to do the right thing and pay his partner. Meeting with a lawyer soon so I can do this the right way. God bless you all **RELEVANT COMMENTS** **Commenter** >It doesn't matter what you all though was fair. Your brother had a will for a reason. He will win the case and your family will have to pay him back what he is due. You will also be paying his attorney fees and any other associated costs. You all did a super shitty thing and he is 100% in the right to sue you. **OOP** >>I am trying to see how I can approach him and his lawyers to set up a plan. He is very angry at us. My father said some negative minor racial massages and am trying to see how I can work with him without making things worse. **OOP Updated the next day when this was crossposted to r/bestoflegaladvice - Update 2 - Aug 8, 2018 (Next Day)** [Update 2](https://www.rareddit.com/r/bestoflegaladvice/comments/95cng7/my_family_didnt_agree_with_following_my_brothers/) Original OP here: I dont know why my post was locked but someone messaged me to come here. I am replying here because am getting death threats. Reflecting I see where my family went wrong. I had a family meeting and we are rounding up and putting together everything we have to pay my brothers friend back all the money he was left. We made a terrible mistake and are trying to fix it. And please, we may not all have supported his relationship but we loved him and are not homophobic like everyone is writing. I take full responsibility because I am the one who convinced my little sister to listen to the family, but I now realize i was wrong. **A 2nd post from another relative was found** [[MA] Extended Family ignored Cousin's will, and stole his spouse's inheritance. How can I help make this right?](https://www.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/comments/9e262t/ma_extended_family_ignored_cousins_will_and_stole/) **Sept 8, 2018** [Copy of the Post](https://imgur.com/a/BIRz6TQ) Ok, this might be a bit unusual, given the type of advice I'm seeking, but I want to know my options here. My cousin recently contacted me and told me she was in some legal trouble. She was asked to execute her late brothers will (finally lost a pretty rough battle with cancer), and in the will it gave a not insignificant sum to his spouse - nearly a million dollars, as I understand it. Should be a relatively simple request. Well, unfortunately, a lot of my mother's side of the family is very VERY conservative, and my late cousin was gay, which, of course, means that his spouse was another man. While this shouldn't be a factor in this, she was coerced by her immediate family to do something that seems very, very dumb to me - instead of honoring the will, she decided to spread the money across the family because they "needed it more", and "we can't just reward a homosexual for his sin". There were several consequences of this - first, my late cousin's spouse got a copy of the will, as it was very strange that he was left nothing (again, he had a rough fight with cancer, plenty of time to put his spouse into his will), and found out he had been shorted about $1M. Then, when he asked the family, and found out the money had been spent, he sued the family, and is looking at pressing criminal charges. My cousin called me Monday about it, and told me the story. She's scared, and doesn't know what to do, and she said they were trying use the first amendment to justify this so they don't have to pay, but it didn't look like that was going to work. She then asked if I could help (idk how, I'm a software dev), as it looked like he was going to win when it went to court, and asked what they should do. At first I asked if they could give the money back, but it had been effectively spent, and even then, they felt they had just cause to disobey the will. Thing is, the family doesn't remorseful about stealing the money - they are sorry they got caught. I don't share their sentiments, and I believe what they have done is very wrong. While I don't know his spouse as well as I'd like, he seems like a nice guy, and I want to make sure he gets what he deserves. I didn't voice that to my cousin though, since she called me to get advice like she did in high school, so instead I told my cousin to get a lawyer (which they have), and maybe his spouse would settle. But in truth, I want justice to be done properly for him. It was a lot to take in, but I've thought about it, and I want to do my part to make sure my cousin's spouse get's what is his. Thing is, I don't know what to do. I've called him this morning to express my condolences, and show my support, which he appreciated (I wasn't involved in this fiasco). But neither of us know if there is any way I can legally help him, other than maybe testifying on character of the family if asked. I want to ask if there is any other things I can do to help. I've thought about helping him pay for his lawyer, but I don't want to cause a conflict of interests or anything. I would like to call my cousin and go over the details in her words again but record the call this time, but I don't know of that's legal or even helpful. And other than that, idk what to do - I live out of state, so it's hard to figure things out. I'm also no expert, just a software dev. If anyone has suggestions on how I can go forward properly, and legally, while still helping to do the right thing, I would appreciate it. I've never done this before, so any guidance at all would be appreciated. Edit: It has come to my attention that my cousin may have made a thread of her own seeking advice on this. I still want advice, but to be safe, I will be deleting this at lunch. Hopefully she doesn't stumble across it before then and I can get a few opinions that will help guide my next steps. I would hate to learn she frequents this sub. Edit 2: Some people seem to be a bit confused here, thinking I'm defending or going easy on my cousin with this. Maybe I am a bit, but I full well acknowledge this is theft, and a huge theft at that. I love her, but I want her and her family to learn a lesson from this about respecting the law, as well as about being decent people. Anything that can be done to help my late cousin's husband is what I'm looking for, not ways to ninja my cousin out of this. Edit 3: A few people have also mentioned that the "respect the law" line is a bit ignorant. I'm leaving it up for context, but I recognize it is a bit callous at least, dangerous at worst. I more mean that I hope the law does what it's supposed to, and has justice done. By extension, I hope that the law teaches them that this kind of thing is not ok, and they change the way they treat others as a result. **THIS IS A REPOST SUB - I AM NOT THE OOP** **DO NOT CONTACT THE OOP's OR COMMENT ON LINKED POSTS, REMEMBER - RULE 7**

**1 year, 1 month, 5 days ago** I posted [ASTS the space trade will cum](https://www.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/comments/1k3o8au/asts_dd_the_space_trade_will_cum/). The six word title told you that the thematic trade around the space sector will materialize and that $ASTS was the public pure-play. The stock was $20 that Monday and it closed this Friday at $105. Seems like the space trade came and most wsb commenters were wrong (hard to believe). To quantify this I have compiled the money hating commenters to publicly shame them at the bottom of this post. If you wish to avoid the same fate all you need to do is read, buy, and hold. Space is *still* undervalued and will re-rate higher(er) in the lead up to the SpaceX IPO. https://preview.redd.it/lf8bav830c3h1.png?width=477&format=png&auto=webp&s=12d3ce43dc252150171a920cdf0438d523f05ef8 Now that the street suddenly cares about space we can quickly compile what they don't understand about ASTS (yet). I know that none of you can read outside of a title of a post but if you were paying attention you would know that SpaceX just filed its S-1 prior to their IPO. As the Patagonia vests pour over it this weekend and try to make some money Tuesday they will likely come across ASTS and see **the white space the name still has**. You can do the same but with less Claude credits by reading this thread. For those new to the story you can read [my DD](https://www.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/comments/1k3o8au/asts_dd_the_space_trade_will_cum/) but in short: ASTS is designing, building, and operating the largest satellites in Low Earth Orbit designed to provide broadband connectivity to **every cell phone on earth.** # TL;DR (it's okay to admit you can't pay attention for long spans of time) * **SpaceX S-1 shows where the money is.** Launch is a commodity; profit is in Starlink-style satellite connectivity. SpaceX is going public at a \~$2T valuation. $ASTS is THE public pure-play leading into the IPO. * **SpaceX names ASTS as a competitor** in their own risk factors. The biggest space company on Earth named ASTS. * **$740B Starlink Mobile TAM** quantified by SpaceX themselves. This is a huge market and ASTS is positioned to dominate it. * **Constellation ramp**: ASTS is set to have 45 sats in orbit by EOY. The next 3 are launching in June — *via SpaceX*. Yes, SpaceX is launching their named competitor's satellites. Imagine that. More batches are rolling out soon and will show the street that production is up to scale. * **Defense / Golden Dome**: the same hardware as the commercial sats does space-based radar. Already in use. DoD scaling it. **2026 government revenue will be a "big contributor"** per the last earnings call. The street still doesn't understand this capability. The company knows where *every* cell phone on earth is located. What is that worth? * **FCC SCS commercial authority granted**. For years the bears (and wsb commenters below) yelled "Elon owns Trump and the FCC. ASTS will never get approval" — wrong. * **Spectrum**: ASTS holds an 80 year lease of 45 MHz of **L-band** spectrum for the US. **SpaceX just paid EchoStar $17B for 50 MHz** of AWS-4 / H-Block - that's the public comp. Apply that comp to the Ligado L-band ASTS controls and sum-of-parts gets you to half of the current market cap on spectrum alone. * **US telco JV**: ASTS already has Verizon and AT&T. T / VZ / TMUS are forming a Direct-to-Device JV to keep Starlink out; SpaceX is being [locked out and blindsided](https://x.com/Gwynne_Shotwell/status/2055000810883346754). When TMUS exclusivity rolls off, ASTS owns the satellite layer of the entire US mobile industry. * **Big tech is circling**: Meta has visited ASTS and is working on WhatsApp connectivity. The question is when Zuckerberg realizes Meta missed the biggest trend after AI and buys a stake in ASTS. # 1. SpaceX's S-1 Is My Bull Case Source: [SpaceX S-1](https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1181412/000162828026036936/spaceexplorationtechnologi.htm) What the market hasn't priced: **Launch is a commodity. Money is in connectivity.** SpaceX's entire pitch is that the value driver isn't rockets — it's Starlink. They are IPO'ing on the back of the satellite-to-consumer connectivity business (with Grok so Elon can get out of some bags). **ASTS is the only public pure-play for a vertically integrated satellite manufacturer.** ASTS also isn't burdened by an AI Chatbot that puts women in bikinis. What is the only public comp worth against the massive SpaceX valuation? More than what ASTS trades at today, I figure. We can break out the segment margins. From the S-1: |Segment|FY25 Revenue|FY25 Adj EBITDA|EBITDA margin| |:-|:-|:-|:-| |Launch|$4,086M|$653M|16%| |**Starlink**|**$11,387M**|**$7,168M**|**63%**| |AI|$3,201M|($1,237M)|negative| **63% EBITDA margins.** Larger than the rocket business that gets all the press. Launch is a 16%-margin commodity. AI is still in the cash-burning $8 burrito and $20 uber anywhere stage of the business. https://preview.redd.it/i87jlx440c3h1.jpg?width=889&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=aa6bcf80306306601b52a4b466d198ae56530146 **SpaceX puts a number on the TAM.** Direct from the filing: >"There were eight billion mobile connected devices globally. … We estimate the Starlink Mobile market opportunity to be **$740 billion** … weighted average monthly mobile ARPU of $8 per user." This is the market ASTS sells into too. ASTS currently has *more and better* global MNO partnerships than SpaceX. **SpaceX lists ASTS as a competitor in the risk factor section:** >"Our Starlink Mobile offering competes with other satellite-to-mobile satellite operators including, among others, **AST SpaceMobile**, Lynk, Globalstar and Skylo." When the largest space company in the world flags you by name in their IPO risk factors, that is not bearish. [You can track SPCX](https://app.hyperliquid.xyz/trade/xyz:SPCX) and its assumed open price via hyperliquid. Multiply the price shown by the float of 11,870,000,000 shares its currently priced at 2.45 Trillion dollars. With a T. Why own that when you can just own ASTS? **I'm not making a judgment on the SpaceX IPO valuation** but if it goes live anywhere near where it is presumed to open then every single public space stock needs to re-rate. They will. **Bonus**: a chunk of recent sales in ASTS is SpaceX investors hedging their private SPCX exposure. That hedge collapses the moment they can offload SpaceX post-IPO (thank your 401k for them). # 2. Production Ramp Is Real And Accelerating * **45 satellites in orbit by end of 2026.** * **Next 3 satellites launch in June via SpaceX.** Once production for the next batch is proven (timeline weeks) we will see a slew of new satellites leaving the facility and entering orbit. A constant string of news over the next 6 months will keep momentum on the stock and the company in headlines as the space sector re-rates. The build-out is happening at the factory level. See the [production in action](https://x.com/AST_SpaceMobile/status/2052850412685041733?s=20). # 3. Golden Dome And The Defense Rerate I caught [flak](https://reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/comments/1k3o8au/asts_dd_the_space_trade_will_cum/mo600i8/) the last time I wrote about Golden Dome. People can stop now. Direct from the last earnings call: >"Remember, we're currently deploying the largest ever phased arrays in low earth orbit, and that gives us really an unprecedented capability to go to regular, small, low-profile handsets as well as do radar capabilities. And when you look at the backdrop of awards and budgets over the last 3 to 6 months, there's been a real strong uptick as expected in the Space Force budget and in allocations related to Golden Dome." >"RFPs are being issued, awards are being made for key elements of Golden Dome that will relate to us, things that you see that are space-based radar and others. So this is a really big moment for us. You're going to see some revenue coming in through U.S. government that's going to be a big contributor to our 2026 revenue." And on the defense capability itself, from CEO Abel Avellan: >"I will not be able to describe it on this forum, but basically, it is a non-communication capability that uses the same hardware that we use on our commercial satellites. And that's been in use today." Translation: the largest phased arrays ever flown in LEO double as space-based radar. The DoD is **already using it** and is scaling it materially. 2026 government revenue is going to be a needle-mover. When this stock rerates from "communications stock" to "communications AND defense stock," the multiple is not where it is today. # 4. FCC SCS Approval — Bears Got Embarrassed For a year the bear case was "Elon controls Trump and the FCC, ASTS will never get commercial authority." That ended in April 2026: * [FCC commercial SCS authorization](https://docs.fcc.gov/public/attachments/DA-26-391A1.pdf) * [Business Wire release](https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20260422147378/en/FCC-Grants-AST-SpaceMobile-Commercial-Authority-to-Deliver-Direct-to-Device-Cellular-Broadband-from-Space-Advancing-Nationwide-Resilient-Cellular-Broadband-Connectivity-in-the-United-States) ASTS has commercial SCS authority. ASTS will continue to gain approvals. The bear case died. What is the value of owning guaranteed parking in space for the largest satellites in low earth orbit? Probably a few bucks. # 5. Spectrum Stack Alone Is Worth Most Of The Market Cap ASTS holds **Ligado L-band spectrum** for the US — a strategic, scarce, mid-band asset built for satellite-to-mobile. SpaceX just paid EchoStar **$17 billion for 50 MHz** of AWS-4 and H-Block to compete in the satellite-to-mobile arena: >"On September 7, 2025, the Company entered into a License Purchase Agreement … with EchoStar Corporation for total consideration of **$17,000 million** … to purchase EchoStar's rights and licenses related to an aggregate of **50 MHz of spectrum** in frequency ranges 2000–2020, 2180–2200, 1915–1920 and 1995–2000 (the AWS-4 and H-Block Licenses)." That's the comp. **The biggest, most sophisticated buyer in the sector just paid $17B for 50 MHz to do what ASTS already has spectrum for.** Apply that price-per-MHz against ASTS's Ligado L-band position and sum-of-parts on the spectrum stack alone covers a large fraction of the current ASTS enterprise value. I actually laid this out in the original writeup before the Echostar purchase and was proven right again. Weird. # 6. US Telco JV — SpaceX Just Got Locked Out, ASTS Is The Replacement State of play in the US: * **ASTS has Verizon and AT&T.** Two of the big three already exclusively partnered for the service over a number of years. * **T-Mobile is exclusive to SpaceX/Starlink — and that exclusivity ends in \~4 months.** * **The big three are forming a Direct-to-Device JV** explicitly to keep Starlink from disintermediating them. SpaceX is being locked out. The SpaceX side noticed. Gwynne Shotwell's reaction: * [Gwynne Shotwell (SpaceX President & COO) on the JV blindside](https://x.com/Gwynne_Shotwell/status/2055000810883346754) * [ASTS commends the proposed DtD JV](https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20260513491108/en/AST-SpaceMobile-Commends-Proposed-Direct-to-Device-Joint-Venture-by-U.S.-Mobile-Network-Operators) When the TMUS exclusivity rolls off and the JV stands up, **ASTS becomes the satellite layer for the entire US mobile industry**. SpaceX gets pushed to enterprise / consumer-direct only on US soil. The carriers — who have the customers, the billing relationships, and the spectrum — back the partner who doesn't compete with them. That partner is ASTS. What is owning the satellite layer of the US mobile industry's defense against Starlink worth? Significantly more than current EV. Do you think the market will realize that the company already has the same in progress in Europe with [Satellite Connect Europe](https://www.satelliteconnecteurope.com/)? # 7. Big Tech Is Going To Wake Up Meta has visited ASTS and is working with ASTS on WhatsApp satellite connectivity: [LinkedIn post from Vinod Samarawickrama (industry insider)](https://www.linkedin.com/posts/vinod-samarawickrama-767bb273_space-satellites-satellites-activity-7446904451719876608-Fflu/). https://preview.redd.it/i7t5dhi50c3h1.jpg?width=346&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a5b59186e19cfe77fb28c376fcf38699b6a44080 Zuckerberg knows that mobile is where the money is ([look at Facebook before their iOS app](https://magazine.wharton.upenn.edu/digital/the-pivotal-tale-from-facebooks-history/)) and he will want to gain exposure to the connectivity layer for every existing cell phone on earth. What is connecting every cell phone on earth worth? https://preview.redd.it/r2i2md560c3h1.jpg?width=896&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ab4ea6997bebe4e601f33fea1659390e1158a09d # 8. Launch Supply [FAA cleared Blue Origin to launch](https://x.com/blueorigin/status/2057927826393944480). Launch supply is no longer a single-vendor SpaceX bottleneck. ASTS has launch agreements with Blue Origin, SpaceX, and (after last earnings call) United Launch Alliance. Being a buyer of launch (instead of a provider of) is bullish. (Launch is a commodity remember?) As prices drop the company who can put the most mass in orbit stands to benefit. That is ASTS. # 9. Space Based Data Centers are Real [Bezos did an interview with CNBC](https://www.cnbc.com/2026/05/20/bezos-blue-origin-space-data-centers.html) and told us that space based data centers are a reality. Elon has said that satellites need [100kW of energy](https://finance.yahoo.com/news/spacex-hiring-turn-elon-musks-104101470.html) to be feasible replacements. Starlink V2 satellites are currently \~28kW according to [Google's research for the effort](https://arxiv.org/pdf/2511.19468). Guess who has the largest satellites in low earth orbit TODAY that have more than 100kW of power? ASTS. https://preview.redd.it/vl9ac6e70c3h1.png?width=798&format=png&auto=webp&s=163f7ec33d6e924a618e779856df396558a6c71f I know people here love to shit on AI and futurism. I think its worth considering that maybe the people putting the most shit in space might actually know what's possible rather than some redditor who has AI derangement syndrome. AI Data Centers will happen and ASTS patents and knowledge launching huge satellites into LEO will play a part. I'm sure of it. The SpaceX S1 has a section titled *We Believe Orbital AI Can Accelerate Time to Power and Reduce Token Costs.* The logical jump to ASTS is going to be simple enough for the street to understand. Maybe you should think about it too. # 10. "But The PE Ratio…" Someone will load this thread and post "lol no earnings" "only 14.7M in revenue lol" "omg price to sales." Its a growth stock, understand the growth potential of the company to understand its valuation. Get your mom to read this to you slowly: You don't value an under-construction oil pipeline at zero because it hasn't shipped a barrel yet. You value the infrastructure for what it will produce when it is built. ASTS is a *GLOBAL UTILITY* building the satellite layer connecting every cell phone on earth. **The buildout is funded. The contracts are signed. The regulatory approval is done. The launches are scheduled.** Here is what the street sees for future growth of the company: https://preview.redd.it/kih97ie80c3h1.jpg?width=2048&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c3f4a24edb0a4976c86d622150deec23746b72ce The PE ratio starts to matter when the constellation is built. Until then you are trading the buildout. The buildout is happening on schedule and **into the hottest cycle for space of all time.** The setup is insane. # 11. Want to Learn More about ASTS? # [Read this](https://www.kookreport.com/post/ast-spacemobile-asts-the-mobile-satellite-cellular-network-monopoly-please-find-my-final-comp). # Position (the number is bigger than last time) https://preview.redd.it/0tuhzy890c3h1.png?width=975&format=png&auto=webp&s=9e1aee4ec13fc0ffa3afd846a0c0f7126be3180d *Posting this obviously leads to a sell off at some point* (as has every one of the posts I've made) but **I've held through it all and will continue to do so**. The trend is up and to the right. Remember chat: In order to make a 100x you need to hold after a 10x. # Look at these idiots https://preview.redd.it/07zsmhga0c3h1.jpg?width=680&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c3bf55cb5c7b57687f3c3beeb2cdc43fbb8cb12c Everyone (I think) who told me I was wrong is on the list below. We will revisit this post in the same way I'm sure. Catch ya next year. I needed to make the links distilled since having too many links got the post removed by reddit. So it's a build your own perma-link scenario. Think of how fun it will be for you! I couldn't tag every user based on the same. If the user deletes the content its saved via artic-shift, no worries. [From ASTS DD: the space trade will cum](https://www.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/comments/1k3o8au/asts_dd_the_space_trade_will_cum/) |Name|Comment|to recreate add | |:-|:-|:-| |rudyallan|They already been thru several rug pulls. He needs newbie to enter the rug pulls.|/mo4e4f1/| |rudyallan|when the regards get an indoctrination. They become ''super Fanboys''. They become ready for the ultimate rug pull.|/mo4eqbd/| |rudyallan|they claim that Blue Origin will launch all their satellites..But Blue Origin have many many problems also|/mo4vuqg/| |rudyallan|Stock brutally Gaped and Beaten.|/moahop9/| |cbusoh66|They need 150+ satellites, they got 4 up, and they're way behind Starlink and Apple going their own wag, and they just diluted and will continue to dilute because they need more than $2 billion, at the very least. And there's no market for satellite service, the TAM for actual paying customers is tiny, Abel is blowing smoke up your asses...|/mo3wj5a/| |cbusoh66|They sent 4 fucking satellites up last year and they just got delayed to send the next batch (sans ASICs) until July at the earliest, how long have they been sitting on their "17" now? They are way behind on everything, as it's their habit, and they need to send hundreds up, good luck with that, they will end up having to dilute again and again, and again.|/mo3zlph/| |cbusoh66|All B.S., they will never turn a profit before the end of the decade and they will dilute to death. ASTS will see single digits sometimes this year.|/mo3t58f/| |Rocketeer006|So here's what happened. ASTS just delayed their next launch which doesn't look to great, so some dumb hedge fund came here to try and pump it with the stupidest post I've ever seen on WSB.|/mo4fu02/| |Rocketeer006|Of fuck off, no you didn't. You're probably a pump bot just like OP|/mo4fyb3/| |Rocketeer006|Didn't this company just delay their next launch? They are falling more and more behind unfortunately|/mo4fkoj/| |c4chokes|How much are you in the hole?? I don't think we can dig you out 😂😂😂|/mo5xmuq/| |c4chokes|Why are you stumping for this company??|/mo6fjqu/| |Hefty\_External\_1212|you're gambling with literally your savings account for health-related expenses? you're a degenerate and I hope your calls keep bleeding|/mo9qduk/| |Hefty\_External\_1212|what a massively transparent cope lmao|/mo9qb0l/| |Hungrymon111|Yes you do, since you posted this for random people to buy in and pump your bags. Once recession starts really rolling this stock will drop/slow bleed to at least -70%. Momentum's already fading.|/mo8wf5g/| |Hungrymon111|Not even 5m in revenues, burning 500M(!!!) and has 7.5B market cap LOL. Good luck, I will not touch this with a 100 meter stick|/mo8ujku/| |ku8475|Couple issues off the bat I see: -These sats work like cell towers in the sky. From my quick research they are looking at about 160ish SATs for the constellation. So assuming the capacity is roughly 2k-5k we are looking at a generous 850k global simultaneous users when the all sats are up…|/mo4o5x7/| |ku8475|Spoken like a true MBA, good luck.|/mo66o7v/| |last-shower-cry-was|Price to sales and EV to sales is over 100.|/mo4dsaf/| |last-shower-cry-was|Great! All it has to do is double revenue every year for 5 years, demonstrate high margins, and it's grown into its current valuation. I can find tons of stocks growing 30% at a P/S of under 1.5. Oops sorry I forgot this is a casino. My bad.|/mo4ez6c/| |Maritime88-|Did you mention the delay? Or the requirement for more capital raises?|/mo5dtob/| |Maritime88-|If you guys aren't selling with both hands , ask yourself why when it's $2 again. More capital raises are required.|/mo5doh5/| |SkatesUp|Nope. It's the same shit regurgitated every time. Stock gets pumped on some mumbo jumbo news and falls back each time...|/moc9mg3/| |SkatesUp|The pumpers are starting to panic - the blind them with science tactic isn't working anymore. Glad I got out when I did.|/mocccaq/| |7fingersDeep|You bunch of fucking morons. The comms are for terrestrial commercial users. Holy fuck. This is not for weapons systems or for missile warning and tracking. I love getting downvoted by people who put their money into a stock when they literally have no fucking idea about the business or technology.|/mo600i8/| |AchyBreaker|Excuse me sir I came here to lose money on stocks not to read entire books|/mo3noma/| |Aggressive-Ad3286|Still a shit company and even shittier stock, no matter how many times you shills try to pump it.|/mof0rjq/| |Aranthos-Faroth|I've been on WSB a long time. This is the longest post I've ever seen here. Puts.|/mo3mos2/| |AxDeath|The first thing I read says "These kinds of companies normally fail", so I think I know everything I need to know|/mo3tzod/| |bnh1978|TL;DR Puts on OP's wife.|/mo3p0bc/| |Cash50911|This convinced me not to buy.... Your comparison about cell phone connectivity uses decade old tech. There are many other things that are just inaccurate or purely speculative. You provided a great narrative but no financials to back up how the company can execute the narrative.|/mo3xl2p/| |chosunwon|OP please show loss porn for today's -12% day. we must know|/moaos0k/| |Designer-Composer820|Down 11.5% after this post. Welcome to Wendy's.|/mobiwcq/| |DLD1123|Space isn't real. Puts.|/mo5umc2/| |domthebomb83|This aged like fine milk|/mo9ilmj/| |ElectricalGene6146|Got it, puts, thanks!|/mo3xhr0/| |FabricationLife|Puts on this garbage because this post is so long is literally has to be cope|/mo5u0ze/| |Fancy-Jackfruit8578|We need to ask Reddit to reduce to 10 character limit to avoid this phd thesisimg|/mo3ovzr/| |Father\_of\_Lies666|Brother, not all satellite companies have failed. Just most. If you don't think SIRI, T, and VZ are satellite companies, you're wrong.|/mo3os3d/| |Federal-Hearing-7270|Don't expect the stock to go up 100% in a week when market cap is on its way to 10 billion and there is no revenue yet. There are too many whiners at the subreddit chat of this stock and there is no need for more|/mo4qhc0/| |figlu|Will be cheaper when stock market crashes|/mo5vhvi/| |fltpath|You failed in your analysis, as it does not address the single point failure in the entire system...the required ground based system, which has to be connected to the cell phone provider network. No ground based system...no connection.|/mo4dx8a/| |frosty765|Lol anyway puts, as they again delayed launch…. Buy around 20, sell 24+ worked for months…|/mo4bjdd/| |Go\_With\_The\_Fleaux|Right. I'm waiting until right till we get close to expiration and exiting the trade. Don't really care what happens to the stock after that.|/mo6642b/| |GoLoco511|We don't want a more comprehensive write up man|/mo3yikt/| |GVtt3rSLVT|I couldn't read all that during one shift of work. Especially about a boring stock|/mo651de/| |Hot-You-7366|as someone who covered Satellites industry at a bank, your missing that satellite service sucks ass. Cant get it indoors, even leaves on trees fuck it up. Its terrible compared to cell towers and wifi. So... yea|/mo9yjhw/| |iannoyyou101|Going long on any stock in this market lmao|/mo5ukqp/| |IcestormsEd|If you need all that to sell us an idea, you are hiding something. But puts it is.|/mo3m38t/| |Invest\_and\_ballout|Took me 5 days to read that post. Now I'm going to short the stock|/mo3qatm/| |JackFourj4|what is their cash position right now, how long till positive cashflow? I like their business but not fond of hopping on hype trains in this climate, might wait it out a bit till the tariff war is over|/mo8jcl6/| |Jelopuddinpop|Not OP, but 2 reasons... 1) they're trying to contribute to the community instead of just leeching others' iddas, and 2) they hold a significant position and are trying to drum up exit liquidity.|/mo5d9wt/| |justbrowse2018|It's up 1000% in a calendar year bro. That seems unsustainable.|/mo40xug/| |MajikoiA3When|No TLDR? Puts it is.|/mo3lxhe/| |Mother\_\_\_Night|They face competition that has large, insurmountable cost advantages and absurd levels of regulatory influence. Puts.|/mo3sl5m/| |Ok-Big-4585|its in a short setup atm unless breakout|/mo7rbxd/| |Ok-Caregiver-1689|Holy shit I ain't reading that, I'll just buy some puts.|/mo3kayp/| |Ok-Resist8342|Oh, I'm one of those Asts sub Reddit morons, don't you worry about that.|/mo4bhln/| |Pepepopowa|Bro they are already dead, stock kicking|/mo6ieol/| |perivascularspaces|You forgot Mango Pres killing the US role in the World and the opposition not even trying to defend it, driving all of your DD into the dirt.|/mo3pldw/| |ProgrammaticallyHip|Yes, they are safer in a recession. But ASTS is down 11% in a month and VZ/T/AMT were down 6.5, 5.5% and 5% at one point respectively during this recent volatility... And ASTS would likely get crushed.|/mo42x4r/| |PuzzleheadedSound407|This guy knows more about the company than the CEO and board combined.. So, puts.|/mo6ouhq/| |sev3791|With all the satellites crowding space already, believe it or not puts 👇|/mo5kyqm/| |shadow\_p|This is a really cool report. I read the whole thing. But I'm still not buying. I don't want to hold your bag.|/mo48nfz/| |skyfox437|Read? My attention span stopped at the pictures.|/mo46aql/| |Southern\_Cap\_816|ASTS has no customer base and the tech is not proven. One launch error and the sell-off begins. Summer is a good time for launch failures.|/mo3ul0m/| |steffur|What happens if SpaceX says we won't fly ASTS satellites anymore. Then...?|/mo3vzrm/| |Strive--|I feel like potential ASTS stock traders are still sifting through this post's coke-driven multi volume keyboard burner of a post, so they haven't had the time to pump and dump the stock, so it sits idle.|/mpn9zr7/| |The\_NiNTARi|Isn't ASTS reliant on SpaceX to launch these satellites? I'd for see that as a major issue|/mo4ou8v/| |thelundyy|Longest and most useless post of all time award! Congrats!|/mo3lax7/| |TonyStarks81|Love the company, hate the current economic climate. Went all cash weeks ago and sold my ASTS that I bought at $10. I will join back in at some point, but right now I don't think anyone would be shocked if this trade war caused more significant bleeding across the market…|/mo44fm8/| |WallStWarlock|What's the catalyst. Needs catalyst|/mr0p1lb/| [From Conviction or mental illness, you decide (ASTS)](https://www.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/comments/1ewg3t9/conviction_or_mental_illness_you_decide_asts/) |Name|Comment|to recreate add | |:-|:-|:-| |jay\_i\_am|Sir! i know how PUMP AND DUMP works lol|/lj2o92l/| |jay\_i\_am|Calm down son! You're very triggered. What sort of life do you live that you have to CON people? Just to make some money. I mean, it's one thing that you made your money (if you actually did). Who knows? this might just be a paper trade. But, to think that you are actually 'helping people' is beyond delusional…|/lj2ta9i/| |jay\_i\_am|I suspect this post is set up to now DUMP ASTS. Trapping a lot of newbies into buying ASTS while this guy (who probably works for some big hedge fund) dumps these shares. CLASSIC PUMP AND DUMP|/lj2gx4a/| |fazellehunter|when you are crying in the shower again, ya tool|/ljg8gnj/| |fazellehunter|i'd buy a put option on your portfolio|/lj3rxqk/| |JayMurdock|Trust me when you lose 80% of these gains, it will be your life story...|/liyfpcd/| |JayMurdock|Mental illness for sure, you don't have an exit plan since you held this long and will be a bag holder when this ultimately explodes. We've entered obscene wildly overvalued territory, the end is coming and it will decimate you all.|/liyfbtf/| |21APE21|Funny, I follow wallstreetbets on Reddit and discord and never heard of anyone betting on $ASTS. Fuck you and everyone else who bank off of this|/lj10zef/| |\_\_\_TychoBrahe|Its been over bought on the daily for the past week almost, EPS off by 188% revenue off by 80%, stock rockets like 50% You: its still got room Oh boy…puts gunna look tasty|/liyeydq/| |anonuemus|just remember to sell when it is low again|/lj04qoc/| |Any\_Anything\_316|did you get sliced in half this morning?|/lj1lexk/| |Apart-Consequence881|More like overbought for 3 months. It's been rallying insanely for 3 months.|/lj0jx1c/| |arbyman85|If you don't sell and up back at $3 definitely as regarded as the ceo who kept his word and didn't do share offering when it made sense on runup. When it becomes apparent a CEO is a dumbass, institutions jump shit fast.|/liz25uq/| |BarnacleHistorical70|You just won the lottery. Time to cash out and get the fk out of the market or start learning the fundamentals|/liyz1tk/| |Big-Professor3578|Nice now take some of that off the table before 18k happens|/lj1pz4r/| |Comfortable-Spell-75|It will end in tears. img|/liyqm8i/| |darktidelegend|Mental illness It has no infrastructure No greater funding No real contracts No ability to service Just an idea and one publicized satellite launch This is exactly the same pump and dump as virgin galactic and they actually have the ability to execute|/liyu2fa/| |Deep-Values-Thinking|Will be awaiting your loss porn|/lj0g6gh/| |DistantGalaxy-1991|Seriously though, you should take 250K of that, put it in something extremely boring and fairly risk free like a mutual fund or 2, and do not let yourself trade with it, ever. You have to recognize that NOBODY gets this kind of success because of skill, it's luck. So congrats for the luck. But if you think you're 'figured out how to do it', you will lost it all before too long.|/lizqm0b/| |Dontknowgoat|Congrats remember to take profit don't be greedy. 😉|/lj12c8s/| |Dstrongest|Less than losing it all or most .|/lj3az0u/| |EatYourMeats|Starlink is launching multiple satellites this month. Their entire business is reliant on starlink. Plus how much money is really available from overarching coverage? Especially when spacex is much better funded and equipped to provide the service? I took out puts yesterday on ASTS. This is euphoria that's short-lived. Yes I'm a gay bear.|/lj1f7tl/| |Elegant-Isopod-4549|I knew I should have shorted this when I see it on wsb|/lj1p7bi/| |Emergency-Eye-2165|Good enough to screenshot…|/liz1iyk/| |expandyourbrain|Seems like a good time to finally get out bud.|/liznyh3/| |FaceClown|Post again once you lose it all!|/lizd4aj/| |Far-Outcome-8170|One thing I've learnt about this sub is that when a ticker gets constantly pushed over several days, it's time to load up on puts.|/lizgf2r/| |Fun\_Audience5220|Set trailing stop loss weekly No revenue yet.|/lizin1w/| |Hopeful-Power9021|What goes up must go down 😃|/liyylt6/| |Jaded\_Frosting7770|Wife's a walking red flag|/lj0dunc/| |JefferyTheQuaxly|Congrats man, in b4 it goes back down to 20k.|/lj1wemc/| |Kwerby|Does regarded count as a mental illness?|/lizg2rd/| |lewdacris916|HAVE YOU SOLD YET?? IF YOU DONT CASH OUT THEN YES 100% MENTAL|/liyikwf/| |lukeehassel|Feels like virgin galactic to me|/lj2hkgo/| |maikaubay|Good enough to screenshot ...|/lj1e3dm/| |MakaveliTheDon831|Please tell me you cash out.|/liywncx/| |ManBearPig\_1983|Twas a legit question. I just looked it up. It's BS that you can only report $3k in losses|/liz1tnb/| |mat\_the\_wyale\_stein|Take 100k off. Sell some covered calls and live the American dream. Put a down payment in a 2 bedroom home in the hood with no picket fence.|/lizi8kt/| |Neat\_Custard5289|i was told invest ASTS, i was told money make big green. where green. sad.|/lj1mxwv/| |No\_Day\_9464|You should definitely sell, that's already life changing money.|/lj2pk3a/| |P\_A\_N\_C\_H\_O\_\_|Have you sold? That would answer your question...|/lj01kx7/| |pinochetlospatos|At least get your initial investment out....|/liyz6fu/| |RaisinPutrid4423|When should we short asts|/lizaitp/| |skankhunt1983|Is it too late to get in? Feels like a pump and dump!!|/liyt1d7/| |SlipstreamSteve|Mental illness with degenerate gambling.|/lizapa2/| |stargazer\_me|Sell I had same n lost it all on one stock|/liyi6v1/| |talentsmart|It's only mental illness if you don't take some chips off the table before you find out whether or not Elon chooses to blow up that rocket before those satellites deploy.|/liyxvuw/| |TheInfiniteBRAIN|As they say: "Bulls make money, bears make money, but pigs get slaughtered."|/liyjslv/| |TrueNorthCoin|Take the money and run|/liywifi/| [From DD: ASTS, a binary bet with deep space value](https://www.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/comments/o0czbg/dd_asts_a_binary_bet_with_deep_space_value/) |Name|Comment|to recreate add | |:-|:-|:-| |fuk\_normies|Pump and dump This place has become a cesspool|/h1upffq/| |idoescompooters|Lol no. This will end up like Iridium Part 1 in 1999. Instead, you should invest in Iridium Part 2 (Iridium NEXT), who actually has side business taking care of the debt (Aireon) in the meantime while they get military contracts for their polar orbits and proprietary waveforms.|/h201inx/| |my5cent|My concern is irdm already has satilites and in some videos they plan to do something similar.|/hbr51ea/| |TheSlipperiestSlope|Bought this shit and immediately lost 5%. Pump and dump bullshit.|/h29ux15/|

**I am NOT OOP, OOP is** u/rosenwasser_ **Originally posted to** r/LegaladviceGerman DO NOT COMMENT ON LINKED POSTS. I am NOT the Original poster. **Previous BoRU** [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/BestofRedditorUpdates/comments/1owtm0q/animal_welfare_wants_dog_back_for_no_reason/) **TRIGGER WARNING:** >!harassment, animal neglect!< **Quick info in advance:** This is a post from a German sub and translated. There might be some translation errors. Animal shelters in Germany and Austria can have relatively strict requirements for new owners, as they want to make sure that the animals find a good home. In the case of found animals, the original owners usually have 6 months to claim their possession. For this reason, when animals are taken over from the animal shelter, a corresponding contract is often drawn up that takes this into account as well as issues such as liability for veterinary costs. [Original Post](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegaladviceGerman/comments/1o2j6mo/tierschutzverein_will_grundlos_hund_zur%C3%BCck_steht/) **Oct 9, 2025** I (live in Austria) adopted a female dog from an (Austrian) animal welfare association eight months ago. I had another dog from the same organization before, there were never any problems. The organization has one of the (already known here) contracts where ownership is not to be transferred. However, the return clause "only" includes cases where I can no longer take care of it as well as animal cruelty. My dog was partially paralyzed (hind legs) when I took her over, because of a vertebral fracture. She had therefore used a wheelchair. Our veterinarian determined that surgery was possible. I also had it done (over 3k €), she can now walk again (limping a bit). The contract stipulates that I cover all veterinary costs and also have to pay for "extraordinary expenses", but no duty to provide information about it. A month ago, I was asked for photos of H (it was also the same with the previous dog) and sent some, was then asked about the state of health, because there was no wheelchair and I just said there was an operation and H was fine. There was a positive reaction and nothing more. A week later I got a WhatsApp message that I had to return the dog because she should no longer live in Vienna and they had a couple with a house and garden that she would take over (no idea if these people really exist). At this point, it may be worth mentioning that H is a "pretty", two-year-old Spitz, in whom there would certainly be a lot of interest without a disability. I wrote back that I was not prepared to do so and that the circumstances in which I would have to return H according to the contract did not apply. Then came the message that it would be "animal cruelty" to keep such a dog in the city in an apartment and that I had "endangered" her because I did not have the surgery approved. I felt that this was cheeky in this context and did not react to further contact, because I thought that the worst thing I would get was a lawyer's letter or, as the worst escalation, a property lawsuit from the district court and that would not hold. Well, yesterday the woman from the organization stood in front of my apartment door and demanded the dog. My neighbors wrote to me that she was there, she also asked if they had keys to my apartment because she had to pick up my dog. I had to go home from work and asked her to leave. When she did not do that and screamed, I called the police. She then claimed that I had "stolen" H from the organization. I showed photos of the dog as well as mail history about the adoption, my neighbors have confirmed that they see H every day. Police thankfully told her that even if the dog was her property, she could not take it on her own. She then left and said she would now report me for theft. A complaint or lawsuit is not my biggest concern now - but she was so upset that I think she could snatch H from me when I'm out with her or do that when she's out with my dog sitter for lunch (she missed her by maybe 45 minutes) and I can't get her back, because God knows where it is. The behavior is also just very bizarre, and I could imagine that there is a mental illness behind it. I don't know what would be best in this situation. Is there anything I can do here? There has been no interference with possession, I am also unsure whether this could fall under dangerous threat, I was overwhelmed but not intimidated much. I am considering whether a declaratory action of property rights could make sense here, but since there is no case law on this topic and the contract at least claims that it is not a purchase contract ("nominal fee" = 450 €), my legal expenses insurance would almost certainly not cover this. **Edit: Oct 10, 2025 (next day)** Thanks for all the feedback and messages! I have now contacted a lawyer who will apply for a restraining order with me next week and go through the contract and then give me an assessment. Dog and I are now with my parents and she will stay here until the legal situation is (more) clear. Please don't take it personally if I don't get in touch, it's a bit too much for me right now. **Relevant comments:** **Commenter** >I am a German and not an Austrian lawyer, but that almost sounds like fraud? * "Adoption" with retention of title (as far as possible, of course) * Make the adopter pay for the surgery * Reclaim the animal * Save costs >In any case, it is of course a breach of contract to reclaim the animal if there is actually no case of animal cruelty. I would insist on that. >Maybe interesting: If you return it, you could at least claim back the surgery costs according to German law. I am relatively sure that there will be a similar regulation in Austria. At least in Germany, the opposing party would also have to prove the case of animal cruelty if it wants the animal back. **OOP** >Thank you! I don't know if this was intentionally "planned", I was told that they didn't know if the fracture was treatable. I rather have the impression that the dog is now "too good" for me in her eyes (as a single without a house, I was only ever offered old or disabled dogs). I find it unlikely that animal cruelty could be credibly argued. H is never alone for more than five hours, lives in an apartment, but in a quiet complex with a park next door. The operation was lege artis. I think there are also enough witnesses for the species-appropriate handling. **Commenter** >Do you know where the dog comes from? Was she a found animal? I once had a case where two animals were already handed over to the adopters and months later the original owner contacted me that the animals had been stolen from her by her ex and abandoned and that she would now like to have them back. Of course, there was a huge drama, and it was concealed from the adopters (by the shelter). **OOP** >What I was told: She was with a breeder and after the injury she was handed over to a boarding house and not picked up. It's believable because of her race, but of course I don't know for sure. >I would understand the whole drama much better if it was the situation you describe. [Update](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegaladviceGerman/comments/1on9kpn/update_tierschutzverein_will_hund_zur%C3%BCck/) **- Nov 3, 2025** Since many have asked me for an update on the post linked above and a lot has happened since then, I don't want to withhold the developments from you. Thank you very much for your great tips! Short summary of the case: Almost a year ago, I adopted a disabled dog who used a wheelchair due to a fracture in the spinal area. This could be eliminated with an operation to such an extent that she now runs (almost) normally. Shortly after the animal welfare organization from which I adopted her noticed this in a photo update, they wanted her back, because (their reason at the time) such a (namely non-disabled) can be placed in a "better" family (than me, a working single woman without a garden). It went so far that the chairwoman of the association tried to get into my apartment to take the dog with her. This was justified by the animal transfer contract, according to which it is not a purchase contract, and they can take back the animals if they are "endangered". Now to the update: As already mentioned in the comments to the last post, H went to my family for some time shortly after the posting, because I was psychologically exhausted and I didn't want to expose my dog walker to the situation, if she were attacked, that would be the next legal case. I found a lawyer who wrote a letter to the organization and argued in summary that the contract was a purchase contract and even if it were not, there would be no prerequisites for taking H with me. I then demanded a cease-and-desist declaration regarding the disturbance of my property to H. It was followed by a completely abstruse response from the daughter of the chairwoman of the organization, in which she claimed that this was her dog. From the exchange of my lawyer with the daughter, the following picture emerges (the other side does not have a lawyer at least now and the letter contains various AI-written questionable statements and arguments): * H was not - as I was told - taken from his former owner. She was the family dog of the daughter of the chairwoman of the organization. Receipts for this were also supplied. After the accident in which she was unable to walk (we don't know how that happened), the daughter could no longer take care of her, because, as she said, she also has small children. * The daughter allegedly asked her mother to find a foster home for H until both children went to school. She had not given her the authority to assign H for an unlimited period of time in the name of her organization. No evidence was provided for this statement. * Now both children are in school, so she wants H back, as allegedly agreed. * According to their AI, I could not obtain any right to possession (and of course no ownership) via the contract, as there is no apparent representation. She would have entrusted the dog to her mother and not to the organization, which is why the prerequisite that she had to arrange for the license is not met and the contract is therefore invalid due to the abuse of authority. (Fun fact: The mother is authorized to sign individually for the organization and also signed my contract on her own.) * As a cost, she is willing to give me € 50 per month as compensation for expenses (for those who don't have dogs - even a problem-free dog costs more), which, by the way, is only € 50 more than I paid for H as a "nominal fee". By the way, I should not get the nominal fee in addition, because it is not a purchase price, but compensation for the general work of the organization (lol). She does not want to pay for the operation and other special costs, because she has not agreed as the owner and in her opinion it would not be a useful management because the operation exceeds the value of the dog several times and the paralysis of H would not be associated with any pain for her (which can hardly be surpassed in cynicism in a dog that is barely two years old in my opinion). Incidentally, this is of course incorrect, as a paralyzed area itself may not be felt, but the pressure points of the wheelchair and in the long term the pain due to unnatural posture are. Well, what can I say, my solicitor has now filed a declaratory action with the district court stating that I have a right to ownership of H's property, or alternatively a permanent right of possession, or alternatively that the daughter must reimburse me for all costs incurred for H, i.e. approximately €7,500. Just to clarify - I definitely want to keep H, but that's exactly why the costs for the daughter should be as high as possible, so that hopefully even if everything else fails, she will leave H with me for that reason. The injunction, which was applied for at the same time, was granted by the court today, so neither the daughter, nor the mother, nor anyone from the organization may disturb my possession of H until the end of the proceedings. Since neighbors spotted the chairwoman twice more after the first incident, H now has a safety harness including a mini camera just in case. My dog walker wasn't up for that sort of trouble, which I understand, which is why H now has to play inside at noon on my working days. The preliminary hearing is not scheduled until early December. My solicitor will also try to reach an out-of-court settlement before then, but the daughter seems very convinced by her AI solicitor. Thankfully, she now has to find a solicitor for the court proceedings due to the amount in dispute. There are now over 150 pages of AI slop in the file (after three weeks of exchanges!), about a third of which contains something relevant, a third German law and a third personal attacks on me. I cannot express in words how little I want to deal with the whole thing. Otherwise, I can only recommend that everyone avoid being as foolish as I was and thinking, ‘Oh well, if the contract for my adopted animal states that I have no ownership rights, nothing will happen.’ It's incredibly stressful for me right now, and of course I wouldn't have gotten a dog from the association without their stupid contract, but it's actually outrageous that people like that, without any specific training, presume to decide the fate of an animal for its entire life after only a few months with them. I'll be happy to let you know how the court ruled on my contract, should it come to that, but that would probably take several more months. **Relevant comments:** **Commenter** >I find it interesting that the dog went to her mother and not to the organization. However, the nominal fee should not be refunded, as it only remunerates the work of the organization. She doesn't seem to be in complete agreement with her argumentation... **OOP** >It happened that my lawyer raised the protection fee herself, If the daughter had admitted in one way or another that it had arrived at her, that would be proof that the organization had acted inappropriately and with that, if you will, you could then perhaps let the organization burst. In addition, it would then of course be clear that the lack of power of attorney to the organization claimed by her was certainly present. **OOP on a comment about giving the name of the organization after the legal issues are resolved** >Hello, yes, that's what I would like to do. The whole thing was also reported by my lawyer to MA 60 (the responsible Viennese municipal department for animal welfare) and the protection fee was discussed by her, among other things, because the organization is eligible for donations and if my "protection fee" goes to the daughter, it would probably be over in any case. I don't want to do that right now, because it could be an issue in settlement negotiations. **Small Update: OOP added a comment on this BORU:** > I just got a PN about this post and as an avid reader of this subreddit, I'm a bit flabbergasted 😂 I'll try to answer some of your questions here, but I probably don't have the bandwidth for them all. >If anyone's interested: My dog is currently doing fine and sleeping on the couch, as for the legal stuff, I don't think anything is going to happen until after the Christmas holidays. >Fun fact: The "H" in the post just means "Hund"=dog, because I didn't want to write the word so many times. \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \----NEW UPDATE ----- [Update #2](https://www.reddit.com/r/LegaladviceGerman/comments/1uimhc1/update_tierschutzverein_will_hund_zur%C3%BCck_habe_nun/) **- June 26, 2026** About 1.5 years ago, I adopted a disabled dog from an animal welfare organization. She has largely recovered following surgery and physical therapy, on which I have now spent over 8,000 euros. After I sent the organization an update video showing that she was walking again, they wanted her back under the pretext that my home was no longer suitable for her (since I live in the city and in an apartment). They even tried to more or less break into my home and kidnap the dog. It later turned out that my dog had previously belonged to the daughter of the association’s president, who had given her up after the accident. Then, suddenly, a different explanation emerged: It was all just temporary; now that the children are older, she can take care of her again; there was a typo in the contract or I was given the wrong form, and I was merely a foster home. They wanted to give me 50 euros a month as compensation. It took forever, but there’s now a final and binding decision: My contract is to be classified as a sales contract, and I therefore own my dog 🎉 Important to note: This is only a first-instance ruling, and another court could view the matter quite differently. It \*does not\* mean that ownership is guaranteed to transfer even in the case of other “protection agreements.” The judge’s ruling discusses the various clauses over several pages, and the following factors were decisive: * The contract is 90% a copy of a sales contract from another animal welfare organization; even at other organizations, such clauses are found almost exclusively in sales contracts * But most importantly: My contract includes a clause stating that the organization will not take my dog if I can no longer care for her, and it explicitly states that they must agree to her being rehomed but are not required to assist me in doing so. The contract is structured so that I bear full responsibility and costs for the rest of her life. I’m very relieved that it didn’t go to a second round and that I’ll now be able to spend the rest of her life with my dog. Thank you all for your support. I wanted to give another update, but I may not respond to comments, as this whole experience has been very draining for me. On a positive note, however, these events have inspired me to resume my law studies, which I had put on hold. EDIT: OOP added [comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/BestofRedditorUpdates/comments/1uqw4fv/comment/owdo70n/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=mweb3x&utm_name=mweb3xcss&utm_term=2&utm_content=share_button) in this BORU and provided [Dog tax](https://imgur.com/a/omjJTHz), also provided additional [info](https://www.reddit.com/r/BestofRedditorUpdates/comments/1uqw4fv/comment/owdsfqc/): **Comment** > I'm a little confused. OOP owns her dog legally now but nothing seemingly happened to the president for harassment?  **OOP** >Hey, I'm the OOP and that's correct. I didn't want any other legal proceedings. I totally understand why it would seem right when reading the case but for me, even this was too much and I just wanted to have my dog. My attorney reported the case with all details to the relevant authorities and was told they will conduct an investigation. Right now their Instagram page is down so maybe there are already steps taken against them. I hope that noone else has to experience this so this was important for me to do but otherwise I want some distance. Reminder - I am not the original poster. DO NOT COMMENT ON LINKED POSTS OR MESSAGE OOP.

**I am NOT the Original Poster. That is** [SlaughteredPiggy](https://www.reddit.com/user/SlaughteredPiggy/) **and** [Adorable\_Profit6044](https://www.reddit.com/user/Adorable_Profit6044/)**.** They posted in r/Scams Thanks to u/PeachyDawn for the rec! # Do NOT comment on Original Posts. This is a long post. **Trigger Warning:** >!financial infidelity; thoughts of suicide; !< **Mood Spoiler:** >!heading in a positive direction seemingly!< **Editor's note:** A pig butchering/slaughtering scheme is a scam where a scammer builds a relationship with someone before convincing them to invest in a fraudulent thing. [link](https://dfpi.ca.gov/news/insights/pig-butchering-how-to-spot-and-report-the-scam/) **Original** [Post](https://www.reddit.com/r/Scams/comments/1j2r4bb/my_spouse_got_caught_in_a_pig_slaughtering_scam/)**: March 3, 2025** ***Editor's note:*** *OOP clarified in a few comments that they didn't want to gender their spouse in the post because they didn't want the internet to make this into a gendered issue.* I'm sharing this here for informational purposes, because I don't want this to happen to anyone else. I'm also open to any advice or roasting. Believe me, I've already said horrible things to myself, there’s not a lot you can say that I haven’t already thought. Late last year, I was not doing well, mentally speaking. My spouse had just gone through some stuff themselves, and we were just moping and not being kind to each other. I said some things that lead them to believe I was exploring the idea of leaving them. I wasn’t, I was actually implying that I was afraid they would leave me. This misunderstanding and general bad vibes compelled my spouse to seek advice from people on social media. One such “friend” posed as a financial adviser at an investment firm and suggested my spouse invest jointly in some sort of diversified asset portfolio. My spouse did so by liquidating a savings account they had from before we got married. I had no knowledge any of this was happening, as I was busy dealing with my own life spontaneously combusting and trying to get back on my feet, and generally being a sad sack. This “investment” had to be made in crypto. Of course. My spouse has been subject to multiple rants from me that crypto is a pyramid scheme, worse than a meme stock, because at least those are insured. So my spouse was somehow assured that the whole thing was legit because only the transfers had to be made in crypto. The rest was put into an “account” and could be seen in USD by logging into a website, with posted transaction history and dividends. A couple of months pass, and the “investment” has basically quadrupled in value. The “friend” entices my spouse to upgrade the account. This is where my spouse begins to draw from our joint accounts, joint savings, and the proceeds we recently got from the sale of our last house. Of course the “friend” knew about the fact that we had massive proceeds from a real estate sale, because my spouse told them. When we sold it, my spouse and I explicitly agreed to roll those proceeds into our current mortgage to reduce our payments by a substantial amount, which would make us much better off financially. At this time, as a result of my issues going away and the sale of that house, which had taken forever, I had gotten my act together and was noticeably happier. Still, for whatever reason, my spouse persisted in hiding that they did something different with the proceeds from me. I was still completely in the dark. Of course, this new input supposedly paid off, and the website reflected even better dividends. My spouse claims that they thought it was legit because of how crypto was going nuts at the time. Of course had my spouse checked in with me at any time, I would have immediately clocked it as a scam from day one. So now comes the real mess. My spouse attempts to close out the investment account. In come the “fees” and “taxes” and what not. I’m still sitting there, happy as can be, thinking of how nice it will be now that I’ve gotten back on my feet to also refinance my stupid mortgage and have money to finally enjoy buying nice things we have been putting off. Of course, all our savings, proceeds, and retirement are gone at this time. So my spouse goes, hat in hand, to their family, who loan them basically an entire master’s degree of student loans worth of money. Spouse converts it all to crypto, as per usual, and away it goes, into the blackhole of fraud, while I blissfully remain completely ignorant, like a total moron. Now the spouse puts in withdrawal requests. They get my spouse’s ID, account numbers, you name it. New fees pop up, new loans are made. Chuck them all in the pile, why not? After a couple of months of delays, moving money around to different “banks” (yes, they had multi-factor log-ins, account histories, and all sorts of nonsense to make it look legit), the spouse starts to get the family coming knocking, asking for payment before they’re hit with taxes. Of course the in-laws did not tell me any of this, so they’re all on my shit list as well, for being complete morons, not figuring out it was a scam, and not once thinking that they should ask my spouse if they had permission from me to borrow six-figures. So the spouse goes to an actual friend, mentions what’s going on, and the actual friend (bless them), clues in the spouse that it sounds fishy. Thus, Valentine’s Day weekend, lucky me, the spouse details the whole sordid thing. Spouse didn’t know it was a scam until they started telling me. I clocked it immediately. Through drips and dribbles, I get the damage. It’s gone. All of it. Our entire savings. And we’re in substantial debt. Our net worth before this was creeping up towards one million. Now it’s six-figures in the red. I’m honestly still in shock. My friends wonder why I haven’t filed for divorce. Probably because all that would accomplish is losing the one thing we have left, as we would have to sell the house. I’ve forced my spouse into marital counseling, and we will be executing papers to make sure the debts are not owned by me jointly, but just my spouse. We’re putting the assets in my name. If I leave, I lose the house and walk away with a massive IOU. But my spouse? They’d be most of the way to a million in debt to me, because of this. I don’t know if I have the heart to do that, since none of this was malicious, it was just really, really fucking stupid. And dishonest. But mostly fucking stupid. Yes I’ve been forcing the spouse to report it all to law enforcement. Of course the spouse freaked out when I immediately clocked it as fraud and went on a rant (not kindly) about how my life’s savings are probably right now financing terrorists who sex traffic teenagers or some other dodgy bullshit. Yes, I know it’s probably all gone and I’m not getting any of it back. Anyway, that’s that. I wanted to share to remind you all that some knowledge can be much deadlier than none. My spouse is educated, as am I, and we’ve done well for ourselves through former investments that have paid off. That led my spouse to complacency and faith in themselves. I believe them when they say they did not know it was a scam. But that does not change the fact that now our retirement is gone, and we have to factor in these horrific debts that shouldn’t exist every time we contemplate doing something completely inane, like spending $2 on brand name oatmeal instead of generic. Please, please, please, do not fall victim to things like this. I do not wish this on anyone. Don’t keep your finances secret from your family, always gut check with someone you know in real life and trust when something seems like a good opportunity. As soon as someone proposes any transaction in crypto, it should be a red flag. Just because there is an account, a website, receipts, and paperwork, it does not mean it is real. ***Some of OOP's Comments:*** ***Editor's note:*** *OOP had many, many comments that contained a lot of good information. I tried to only include the most illustrative and helpful ones, but if you have a specific question, OOP probably answered it.* *To a deleted commenter:* >Me? Yeah, I shouldn't have been checked out of what was going on with the accounts while trying to recover from a professional setback. The spouse? Product of highly religious upbringing, I've come to find out. I did not fully appreciate the extent to which being indoctrinated in extreme blind faith on a regular basis when you're super young does to set you up for a lifetime of being taken advantage of. *Talk to a bankruptcy lawyer:* >We're talking to a BK attorney right now. We're kind of fucked either way. These are all private loans, so our credit is still pristine. If we go BK, the loans disappear, but so does our good credit. If we don't go BK, the loans can be slowly repaid (family will restructure), and we keep our credit scores. *OOP adds:* I want to go BK, we have the intake appointment later this month. If I have some attorneys verifying its the right thing to do, it's going to be a painful ultimatum to the spouse: burn your family, or burn me. Their decision will tell me a lot of things. Commenter: The spouse who fell for the scam should be removed from all accounts. Obviously he doesn't have the wherewithal to avoid the scams >**OOP:** Already done. We have two separate accounts and a single joint one right now. My income goes into one, the mortgage is paid there. Spouse's income goes into the other, the debts that are due right now are paid there. Everything else is on a credit card, and is paid out of the joint, after we split the amount due and transfer from separate accounts into the joint. I made the spouse come clean to all of our close friends and family, including mine. Everyone knows they are in the dog house financially, and has been told to tattle to me about anything, with the consequence being that I will leave and leave them to pay back the loans themselves (they can't, they're only going to recoup if I don't leave). Commenter: \[...\] Also Op, were you not getting notifications or checking the joint account ? >**OOP:** Nope, bills were getting paid on time and in full, and I wasn't checking the individual drill-downs in accounts in our financial reporting software. I have full access, and I just checked top-line amounts. Like, yep, the full value of money in all our accounts is in there. But because the "investment account" (read: fake) was created as an account in our software, it didn't show the money missing, because the full value of the "investment account" equaled the "transfers" from legitimate accounts. I was also really fucked up. I downplayed it in the OG post, but I was considering checking myself into an in-patient mental health hold because I was basically full-on hallucinating on a weekly basis. I was really not with it for the better part of three months, and wholly trying to get out of a mental health crisis while my spouse was also having one as well, and mostly emotionally unavailable. I know they didn't do this maliciously, but it does kind of feel like punishment for losing my shit. *OOP clarifies:* My spouse, I don't believe they wanted to get caught in a scam maliciously. Commenter: I am very sorry this happened to you. This won't make you feel much better but it has happened to a lot of sophisticated people. The Economist did a 7 part podcast on Pig Butchering that might be worth listening to as you will hear about others in a similar situation. >**OOP:** I think I'll take a listen, to further contextualize it. A lot of people don't realize that when something like this happens, the shame is really what kills you. For a while, I was afraid my spouse was going to take themselves out because of how upset they were with themselves. Commenter: Even if intentions were good, it is completely disrespectful that your spouse and their family went behind your back to throw away not just their own but your combined assets/money. >**OOP:** I'm exploring options to get out from under the debt. I can start over at zero, but I'm not willing to be a willing victim to being in the red and the years of toil that it will take to get out from under these debts, none of which I knew about or consented to. I have always been fiscally conservative with my finances, and made a lot of sacrifices in my 20s and 30s instead of taking nice trips, buying nice things, and going to top schools and taking on debt. I'm not flushing that down the toilet even more than I already have. It's probably going to come down to them figuring out they have to tell their family they can't pay the debt or letting me file for divorce. I would never, ever chose to marry someone as far into debt as they are now, at the age I'm at, with the amount of money I make. I still love them, I probably always will, but I would never respect myself again if I indentured myself to their family, who collaborated in this theft with them. Commenter: \[...\] Only one piece of advice from me: the scammers stole your money. Don't let them also steal your marriage. Don't let *criminals who viciously attacked you* be the cause of you and your spouse losing things that matter even more than money. Right? >**OOP:** Thanks, that is where I am right now. I don't gain anything from leaving, so long as they are trying to make it right. I've already made it pretty clear that if they stop trying, I'm gone, and I'm the one who has lawyers for friends, not them, so I'm not taking those loans in the divorce. *Spouse's education:* >Oh it's mega stupid. For the record, I have an arts doctorate, they have a STEM masters. You'd think that would mean I would be the gullible one, but no. The crypto wasn't the investment. It was the mechanism that was used to make transfers. The investment was sold as some sort of diversified portfolio. The "friend" said it did include some crypto. I don't think my spouse ever verified what was allegedly in this "portfolio." Like I said, it's extremely dumb. But that's how these scams work. This was a friend they made online. They talked for *months* about inane things like shared hobbies, books, and TV shows. There was trust there, when there shouldn't have been. I know the people I meet online can be fake. Hell, I'd made fake accounts on purpose to shitpost. They didn't know that, until this. *Did spouse attempt to validate things:* >Yes, the problem was that these sites looked completely legitimate from the outside. They had phone numbers set up, email accounts, and all sorts of navigable pages. To set up an "account" the website had two-factor authentication, and posted "transactions" that matched what the people my spouse were in contact with told them. There were multiple websites they set up to transfer "funds" around that reflected these "transactions." I would have spotted it as a fake, but I've created and maintained websites before, so I know how easily things like this can be spoofed, and what points to something being wrong. That's why the financial transparency would have prevented this. I would have spotted this as a scam *from day one*, and it is what makes moving on so difficult. *Spouse's response to all of this:* We're in marriage counseling, so the long and short of it is, I don't really know where they were at, not fully, and not yet. It's hard for me to parse out, because I wouldn't even spend or transfer $200 without telling them. I'm an over sharer, I am mostly incapable of emotional unavailability, which is what led to this. I can't keep a secret. I once gave them the silent treatment for six hours. That was all I lasted. If they're not mentally with it? They can ice me out for weeks. I think they also ice themselves out, and don't know they're in distress. I have a hard time imagining what that is like. Right now, they're mostly really beating the shit out of themselves, and convinced I'm a lot more upset and resentful than I am. I told them they can't pull emotionally away or I will leave, because I can't cope with this by myself. The reason this allegedly happened is that I was really mentally fucked up for a solid three months. Like to the point I might have needed to check myself into a hospital type of fucked up. They had a pretty bad thing happen some months prior, and had been withdrawn ever since. So when something happened to me, the lack of emotional support, which wasn't great before that, made me completely lose my shit. I was fully convinced that they were going to leave me, so I asked them about why they were so distant, begged them to stop. In their estimation, this actually meant I was going to leave. So they took an account that they had prior to the marriage, and "invested" it, with the goal of making it easier for us to split without either losing the house. Their parents regularly do this, because they are very distant and hate each other, so the concept of having "an escape plan" isn't alien to them, but it is to me. If I'm going to leave, I don't talk about it, I go to an attorney. I believe they thought it was legit. They've asked my permission to "loan" money to people they told me were good for it (they weren't) before. They have a habit of being gullible. When we met, the in-laws wanted me to buy in to an MLM, and I had to explain to my spouse that if they talk about it at the wedding, I will kick them out. They've just always been the type to think the best of people. The "friend" they had been talking to had been buttering them up for months. They know I post a lot online, so I guess they assumed it was safe (we met online, too). I believe they're also very sorry. The day after they fessed up they called my parents and came clean, told my dad and mom it was 100% on them and not me at all. I assume someone avoiding responsibility wouldn't do that. I don't know, we've never had marital issues. Never thought I'd be in a situation like this. It's hard to know what is normal. **Mini Update in** [Comments](https://www.reddit.com/r/Scams/comments/1j2r4bb/comment/mg6ijz3/?context=3)**: March 5, 2025 (2 days from OG post)** They've filed reports with pretty much every federal agency now, we have a meeting with a detective for our city this weekend. I've looked into the messages. It's just friendly things like memes, commiserating about work and politics, and book recommendations. I don't know if it's worse or better that my spouse is so gullible as to invest with a "friend" rather than the scammer having to feign romantic interest to get them roped in. There was very little in there about keeping it a secret. They didn't really discuss that at all or entice my spouse to be duplicitous. Just more like my spouse would say that "my spouse is going through a rough time" and they would talk about that occasionally. I'm having trouble with the fact that the secrecy was almost perfunctory, and little to no effort was even put into thinking about what my spouse was doing or why, and if I should be circled in. There doesn't appear to be malice in any of the statements about me, just genuine worry, but then they kept it from me, almost out of reflex. It's a puzzle, it seems to point to something in my spouse's default state that needs to be changed. Which is what we're working on in therapy. **Update** [Post](https://www.reddit.com/r/Scams/comments/1n6zk80/update_my_spouse_got_caught_in_a_pig_slaughtering/)**: September 2, 2025 (6 months later)** Hello again, all. You probably remember me as [u/SlaughteredPiggy](https://www.reddit.com/user/SlaughteredPiggy/). When I made that account, and [posted about the scam](https://www.reddit.com/r/Scams/comments/1j2r4bb/my_spouse_got_caught_in_a_pig_slaughtering_scam/) my spouse got caught in, I was so paranoid I did not link it to any of my personal information, nor did I use any of my customary passwords. So, alas, my brain has forgotten the log in information. But it is me, you can run my rambling through an AI if you want confirmation; I think I still write the same way. Anyway, because so many of you told me that it helped you that I was so open with what happened to me when my spouse lost our life's savings in a pig slaughtering scam (upwards of $500K, including loans taken out for the scam "fees" to withdraw the fake "proceeds" of the investment), I figure it may help some people to hear some updates. First and foremost, we are still married and together, and planning a vacation to celebrate a milestone anniversary later this year. Of course, the trip is less grand than I envisioned, for obvious reasons. Perhaps TMI, but we also resumed having sex and behaving like a normal married couple. Our family planning, once derailed, is also back on track. The spouse had libido problems from the negative self worth, but pushed them through it. I refused to punish myself with a dead bedroom. Second, my spouse was not cheating, emotionally or physically. We have decided to call what happened financial infidelity, because of the lack of disclosure, even if it was not outright lying. I made my spouse recover all of the messages between them and the person that was the bait for the scam. It was honestly a little funny how thick my spouse was. The bait person (the pictures were real, but the messages were AI) was obviously trying to flirt on several occasions, but it went right over my spouse's head, and they continued to say nice things about me. This was a relief to see. I would have never stayed if the scam involved cheating, even if it was just messages, or bad mouthing me in any way. My spouse was completely taken in by overtures of platonic friendship and AI-aided conversations of shared interests. This naivety is an issue from a very sheltered religious upbringing, and par for the course for my spouse. Which brings me to the third thing: we have separated finances. Every cent that comes out of our joint account is shared in screenshots. We also separated all finances that are not for shared expenses like utilities and the house. We agreed to execute a post-nuptial agreement that acknowledges all debts associated with the scam (my spouse borrowed money from their family for the fake "fees") are my spouse's sole and separate property, and all equity in the house is mine, sans that which exceeds the amount my spouse "wasted" from the community (i.e., all of our real estate proceeds, a retirement account, and then some). The figure is large enough that our house's value would have to hit >$1M before my spouse is entitled to anything. Basically, if we divorce, I'm off the hook for everything, and my spouse owes me a hefty sum in perpetuity, which I can execute via a judgment to garnish wages. Fourth, we have not come to an agreement on the loans to my spouse's family. I refuse to pay them off, not one cent, because the in-laws all participated in this scam without once checking in with me to see if it was okay that they were funneling around hundreds of thousands of dollars. They have not insisted they be repaid... yet. That was my condition to staying in the marriage: I'm not chaining myself to people with an IOU who participated in the breach of trust. The spouse agreed. I think my spouse wants to wear me down eventually, but it's not going to happen. I'm far more stubborn than them. I can tell they're already halfway resigned to disappointing their family. I'm not sorry. They made a stupid "investment." I did not. They can eat the loss, I already ate far more loss than they did. Loss for all! Get it while it's hot! Fifth, the overwhelming guilt my spouse feels on a daily or weekly basis is a huge bummer. So we've been in couple's therapy. The self-flagellation is annoying, and I can basically forget the scam happened until they throw a pity party. I'm fine with them feeling bad, but the increasingly less frequent doldrums also punish me, so we're working on it. I also have massive trust issues that were stirred up from the fallout, no shock there. Another couple in our orbit went through something similar (concealed business debts) and actually *did* break up, which spooked my spouse considerably. So far, there have been no relapses, and our friend group has been on my side, and helping us get our lives back on track. Sixth, and on to the most positive news. I got a **massive** raise, which has dug us out of the hole much faster than I thought. Last week our household net worth went positive again. This was very exciting, and we went out to celebrate! It pleases me how fortunate we are that not a lot about our daily existence changed, despite how much money we lost. I still have days where I'm mad and genuinely uncharitable, but they come less frequently with time. My earning potential is very good, and so is my spouse's. I'm making them do some more work to get additional certifications for their career. In ten years, I think we'll look back at this and see it as a speed bump rather than a mountain. My own family has been a rock through this. My father really stepped up and has been so supportive emotionally. He has been calling my spouse and kindled a fairly close child-parent-like relationship with them, to remind them that they're part of the family. This has been very positive for me, because this happened because my spouse is naive, has issues with self-doubt, and does not have a good emotionally supportive relationship with their parents. So the doldrums that annoy me are more fleeting the more my father bonds with my spouse and knocks them out of a funk. The spouse's family are emotionally stinted and extremely naive, as you may have guessed, so talking to my father has been good for my spouse. Funny enough, we also uncovered a sordid family of big financial losses. My father's wife (we're not blood related) lost about half of what we did through bad investments in the early 2000s. Apparently there was talk of divorce and bankruptcy at the time, but they stayed together. And, like us, they made too much to go bankrupt. That's been a bit of a bummer, but my credit score thanks me for not declaring bankruptcy. Also, my own grandparents apparently lost close to ***$10M*** in the savings and loan scandals. Goes to show you how many people get caught in these traps. On the law enforcement front, nothing has happened. Trump ripping apart the DOJ and FBI means nobody in the federal government has done anything, although we did get a call from a Secret Service guy that went nowhere. I made the spouse report the scam *everywhere*, no matter how much I could tell it pained them to relive their own foolishness. Local police tracked the wallets to an address in Africa, so we're basically SOL. The money is gone, as I suspected. They occasionally still IM the spouse, looking for more money, and we dutifully forward the information to law enforcement. I think I will look into getting a federal judgment recorded and on file with what little we know about this person and their aliases, at least before the statute of limitations for fraud runs. I know it's probably futile, but for this amount of money, even a 0.01% chance of getting anything back is worth it, even for the filing fees. I just want a public record of what this evil person did to us. Anyway, that's what has been going on. I wouldn't call it a happy ending, but I did not blow up my life, and we have not lost the house, any cars, or anything like that. Nobody has self-harmed either. I hope that those of you that have been taken by such scams, or will be taken, can gain some measure of peace knowing that there is a way out of this sort of betrayal and financial ruination. Many thanks for your kind words, even the ones that were not kind towards my spouse. I needed space to be angry, hurt, confused, and uncharitable, and Reddit provided it.

Panthalassa, a startup based in Portland, Oregon, is developing 85-meter-tall floating offshore platforms that could power AI computing using ocean waves instead of land-based electricity. The lollipop-shaped steel structures generate continuous power through wave-driven turbines, cool AI hardware with naturally cold seawater, and connect to users via Starlink satellites, eliminating the need for power grids or undersea cables. Backed by a $140 million Series B funding round led by Peter Thiel, the company plans to deploy its first commercial wave-powered AI nodes in the northern Pacific by 2027. References; 1. Panthalassa Raises $140 Million to Power AI at Sea: [https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/panthalassa-raises-140-million-to-power-ai-at-sea-302761078.html](https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/panthalassa-raises-140-million-to-power-ai-at-sea-302761078.html) 2. US tech billionaire leads $140mn investment into Panthalassa as search for AI power pushes into exotic new frontiers: [https://www.ft.com/content/711ce313-16fb-4a12-b6be-fbed547c8a39](https://www.ft.com/content/711ce313-16fb-4a12-b6be-fbed547c8a39) 3. Startup plans to move from prototypes to commercial offshore compute nodes powered by ocean energy: [https://www.techspot.com/news/112295-startup-raised-140-million-build-wave-powered-ai.html](https://www.techspot.com/news/112295-startup-raised-140-million-build-wave-powered-ai.html) 4. Fully-integrated offshore data center to transmit data to land via satellite: [https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/artificial-intelligence/palantir-co-founder-peter-thiel-backs-usd140m-wave-powered-ai-data-center-startup-panthalassa-aims-to-run-offshore-compute-nodes-using-ocean-energy](https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/artificial-intelligence/palantir-co-founder-peter-thiel-backs-usd140m-wave-powered-ai-data-center-startup-panthalassa-aims-to-run-offshore-compute-nodes-using-ocean-energy)

**TL;DR: The new Presidential Admin \[Trump Administration\] wants a resolution to the MMTLP situation \[an indefinitely halted stock full of naked short positions\]. The company that issued MMTLP successfully filed subpoenas to Citadel, Virtue, DTCC, and others for trading and share data. Multiple credible sources further confirm (1) the MMTLP stock price's exponential explosion before the rare U3 halt and reversal and (2) that a resolution is virtually guaranteed at this point. Upon resolution of MMTLP, the gates open for the resolution of naked shorting with GME as well as other heavily naked shorted basket stocks.** ———————————————————————————————————————————————— Recommended Prerequisite DD: 1. [The Golden Treasure Part I \[100% Proof Apes Get Paid\]](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/1ahuip4/the_golden_treasure_100_proof_apes_get_paid/) ———————————————————————————————————————————————— [The Golden Treasure Part II \[100% Proof Apes Get Paid\]](https://imgur.com/a/iBtj97o) §1: MMTLP History to Now / Further Confirmation of Naked Shorting §2: New Presidential Administration Wants Resolution §3: Post-Resolution Opens Gates for GME Resolution ———————————————————————————————————————————————— **§1: MMTLP History to Now / Further Confirmation of Naked Shorting** I want to start with a quick disclaimer for those that haven't read Part I of my DD, or those that need a refresher. **This stock is non-tradeable.** It has been that way for years at this point. You can neither buy nor sell it. So, this DD, is in no way, shape, or form, some advertisement to get investors to purchase this stock. That being said, the situation surrounding MMTLP/Next Bridge Hydrocarbons is highly relevant to GME. I'll get into a general history of the foundation of MMTLP and events leading to the current circumstances, and I'll try to condense the history here, but bare with me, because it can get complicated. From what I've gathered, MMTLP started as a preferred share stock dividend that was given out to holders of TRCH in June, 2021 as part of a reverse merger with MMAT. Essentially, MMTLP was a spinoff from MMAT that later resulted into the creation of Next Bridge Hydrocarbons (an oil and gas company) in December 2022. The interesting thing is that this dividend (MMTLP) was never supposed to trade, but it began trading in October, 2021. The CEO of TRCH at the time, John Brda, stated that not only was it never supposed to trade (See page 2 of [Report from Congressional Research Service on MMTLP \[2023\]](https://www.congress.gov/crs_external_products/IN/PDF/IN12228/IN12228.2.pdf)), but he wasn't able to find out who made it trade. FINRA, a regulatory agency overseeing the trading of stocks, approved it to trade, but declined to tell the executives at TRCH who "pushed the button" and made it trade unauthorized. It is theorized that SHFs (short hedge funds) "forced" MMTLP to trade, so that they could heavily naked short the stock; thereby, making profits as usual. The company was aware of this and proactively tried to protect investors from having their stock manipulated. Fast forward to December 2022, MMTLP, the spinoff, was going to go private. Trading was supposed to last until December 12, 2022, then become Next Bridge Hydrocarbons (the Vice President of OTC Markets even confirmed it was supposed to trade up until the 12th). By going private, **all short positions were supposed to close**. This could, depending on how heavily naked shorted MMTLP was, beget a short squeeze, leading to the 12th of December, 2022. That was the theory, and it turned out to be correct, because on December 9, 2022, multiple investors reported their limit stop orders were getting executed on December 9th (See "The Golden Treasure Part I"). Further evidence, in addition to the evidence presented in Part I of my DD, solidifies the fact that prices were indeed going for 100x-10,000x right before FINRA stepped in an U3 Halted the stock and reversed trades on December 9, 2022. [Trading data from E-Trade](https://x.com/anna_trades/status/1812508669742813649) shows right before trading was halted, that there was a short squeeze: https://preview.redd.it/hmlxf9trfoxf1.png?width=320&format=png&auto=webp&s=354661eb5115a3757246d3f44cf3cedba7f25fdd [](https://preview.redd.it/the-golden-treasure-part-ii-100-proof-apes-get-paid-v0-i1vog29c1mxf1.jpg?width=426&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=35b8f71330404a145727c0610256f093759620fb) Moreover, a highly credible source in the community (Drew Diligence; who has acted as a liaison between Congress and obtaining a resolution for MMTLP shareholders, garnering letters of support from over a dozen members of Congress) stated that he is aware of at least 1 person that got a 10-99 tax form from the IRS confirming that his shares were executed at prices ranging from $250-$500 (around a 120x of its $3 price pre-squeeze). https://reddit.com/link/1ohiz4y/video/w7i641kmioxf1/player So, yes, there was unequivocally a short squeeze right before FINRA U3 Halted the stock and reversed trades. This would also explain exactly why FINRA U3 Halted the stock, since a "U3" halt is a trading code that stands for "Extraordinary Events Halt" (the extraordinary event here, would be that SHFs were indisputably about to get liquidated). Moreover, MMTLP was the last stock to be U3 halted by FINRA, [according to data from FINRA itself](https://otce.finra.org/otce/tradingHalts). By indefinitely U3 halting the stock, FINRA (1) froze the stock, (2) protected SHFs from needing to close their short positions, and (3) locked all 64,000+ MMTLP investors in this crime scene. After FINRA U3 Halted the stock and reversed trades, tens of thousands of investors began working to get transparency and a resolution towards trading, reaching out to state and federal representatives, filing lawsuits against FINRA, protesting outside the SEC HQ in D.C, etc. The company (MMTLP/Next Bridge Hydrocarbons) has also been fighting back as well. FINRA published an FAQ in March 2023, stating that there were only 2.65 million unclosed short positions. Next Bridge Hydrocarbons published a press release directly contradicting FINRA, stating financial institutions have called them looking to buy shares to balance their books, and that **1 single financial institution admitted their shareholder imbalance was multiples more than the number FINRA stated on their FAQ**: https://preview.redd.it/a6lim6tvfoxf1.jpg?width=1241&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e8495b79086ee0d453f91c742d7649a050e3d0bd [](https://preview.redd.it/the-golden-treasure-part-ii-100-proof-apes-get-paid-v0-6dzaelwj1mxf1.jpg?width=1241&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=83130f6ef9ae58cf5d6f1e217f9792ab7d961ad7) NBH (Next Bridge Hydrocarbons) has also been proactive in trying to get a resolution for shareholders, demanding in a press release that shareholders be given the "total aggregate outstanding uncovered short positions held by foreign and domestic institutions that exceed the issued and outstanding shares of the company": https://preview.redd.it/uy37lvqwfoxf1.jpg?width=1177&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5fffba4b8f0bd9c183dfb02e7186c9a76fc0c9b7 [](https://preview.redd.it/the-golden-treasure-part-ii-100-proof-apes-get-paid-v0-wg185hxk1mxf1.jpg?width=1177&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d3add8544a7c8f69fd86965db29220020c16a20d) In the meantime, while shareholders and the company were pushing for a resolution, SHFs, etc., were attempting, behind the scenes, to get the company into bankruptcy (that way, they wouldn't have to worry about closing their short positions). In addition, many shareholders that were publicly trying to get a resolution in Congress were threatened, smeared, their families were threatened. The CEO of NBH himself, Greg McCabe, [stated in an email that his daughter, his family were receiving threats.](https://x.com/RedHeelzz/status/1874144952604631311) He said, verbatim: "“These attacks started with a vicious social media smear campaign and frivolous lawsuits, but have now escalated to multiple anonymous threats via texts and emails. **They crossed an unforgivable line when they sent a threatening email about me to my daughter-in-law at the private school where she teaches, and they had the audacity to copy every member of the faculty.** My wife taught at this school for 20 years, all four of our children graduated from there, and now two of my grandchildren attend.” One MMTLP investor, in particular, Richard Fizzuoglio, someone who walked the halls of Congress to obtain Congressional support towards a resolution, was receiving threats to himself as well as his family to the point that I believe it broke him mentally. He unfortunately ended up....[passing away](https://x.com/KarmaCollects/status/1965113460586684650). Look, this is also a dark story, and as a DD writer who has personally received threats to my family and I (and is aware of other DD writers who have received threats) I very much empathize with this. In addition, NBH tried to raise money, but was roadblocked by the previous SEC administration, constantly preventing the company from filing an S-1 by requesting an unreasonable amount of paperwork/revisions to their filings \[i[t should be noted that this issue has recently been resolved as of October 2025 between NBH and the new SEC](https://x.com/nbhydrocarbons/status/1973496489046581392)\]. Now, I've personally taken a decent amount of legal classes/read law books, and I know that during the 2008 financial crisis, lawyers had a strategy called "produce the note", where they'd keep requesting documents to delay a foreclosure process. They could commonly successfully delay foreclosure for several years just requesting things, which would help out their client. In this case, if the previous SEC was in bed with SHFs, and they agreed to get NBH bankrupt (especially because a resolution to the MMTLP scandal would completely undermine them and FINRA), it would make sense for them to continually use similar delay tactics to keep NBH from making money. Lastly, in 2024, Next Bridge Hydrocarbons, which is an oil and gas company, "somehow" lost an Orogrande lease , a lease to a plot of land that was going to be their primary source of profits. The leaser, University Lands, didn't provide an explanation as to why, even though the CEO of NBH [offered 10x the royalties from his previous agreement with them](https://x.com/RedHeelzz/status/1888239101914022363). It's an illogical decision from University Lands, which is exactly why I reasonably believe that SHFs, needing NBH to go bankrupt, and knowing their primary source of profits, went out of their way to take the lease away from NBH. The NBH CEO, Greg McCabe, [responded in an email regarding the lose of the lease](https://x.com/canwill35/status/1844508585885339655), referring to "very dark forces at multiple fronts": https://preview.redd.it/ukwrmydzfoxf1.jpg?width=1241&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2c70538258b75ac456aecbc97dd46f73540e4a6c [](https://preview.redd.it/the-golden-treasure-part-ii-100-proof-apes-get-paid-v0-kwadv9dm1mxf1.jpg?width=1241&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7524ad4e00fda40756ec61f87947b75534d50546) It is my strong believe that SHFs employed bad actors to do whatever it takes to break people, harm the company, and do whatever is necessary to sabotage a resolution. Which would make sense, considering their companies are on the line, and I've seen somewhat similar Machiavellian behavior from them towards the GME community since 2021. Anyways, there were several other tactics SHFs/bad actors have been using to try to get NBH bankrupt, such as vexatious litigation to waste NBH's assets via attorney's fees (comparable to [when scientology filed 50+ lawsuits against the Cult Awareness Network, which drove them bankrupt, even though most suits were dismissed](https://www.cnn.com/US/9612/19/scientology/index.html?eref=sitesearch#:~:text=Since%201991%2C%2050%20lawsuits%20were,of%20the%20Cult%20Awareness%20Network)), attempting to hijack the community and make shareholders target the CEO instead of SHFs (similar with bad actors trying to get GME shareholders to attack Ryan Cohen), etc. I'm not going to get in all that other stuff, because it would take forever, and the primary purpose of this DD would be missed. That being said, this particular company and its community have been through an extreme amount of hardship, but they are immensely fierce. The amount of effort they put into reaching out to Congressional representatives, filing FOIAs, outreach, filing reports to the OIG/DOJ, and so much more, it has been extraordinary to see this magnitude of resilience. And luckily, the stars have aligned for a resolution, because with the new Presidential Administration, the MMTLP community now has the support from the Executive Branch of the U.S Government. ———————————————————————————————————————————————— **§2: New Presidential Administration Wants Resolution** The new Presidential Administration (the Trump Admin) is full of officials and parties that are not only fully aware of the MMTLP situation, but they support a resolution. I'll name a decent number of the ones I'm aware of: 1. Vice President V.D Vance He was among the 100+ members of Congress during 2023-2024 [demanding transparency on MMTLP to the SEC](https://www.crapo.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/mmtlpsecletter09262023.pdf). https://preview.redd.it/qjo0ogh2goxf1.png?width=1275&format=png&auto=webp&s=24f367e51e516e946ac9bf733d03f7b1c3bbdcda [](https://preview.redd.it/the-golden-treasure-part-ii-100-proof-apes-get-paid-v0-4vvd9rnn1mxf1.png?width=1275&format=png&auto=webp&s=dc2659be5c72cdfb606ae553e450af38aaf1722c) 2. Bill Pulte \[Director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency and the Chairman of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac\] Bill Pulte has been publicly vocal of his support towards a resolution towards MMTLP in the past, having spoken about MMTLP [in a space call with Andrew Tate](https://x.com/xMarketNews/status/1799224318238527703) on the matter: https://reddit.com/link/1ohiz4y/video/smxt9ouajoxf1/player 3. Andrew Bailey \[Co-Deputy Director of the FBI\] Andrew Bailey has publicly voiced his [support for a resolution to MMTLP](https://x.com/MetaMan1111/status/1957577774501093881). In an interview with the Robb Carter Show, regarding MMTLP, Bailey expressed his disdain to the SEC for not taking initiative towards getting a resolution for shareholders. 4. Robert F. Kennedy Jr. \[U.S Secretary of Health and Human Services\] He [reposted a post on "X" regarding MMTLP](https://x.com/RobertKennedyJr/status/1838374959741063375), demanding answers from FINRA, while calling FINRA, Gensler, the DTCC, etc., thieves. This was a repost from his official "X" account (with millions of followers), which I did consider significant that he would align himself with that position. https://preview.redd.it/01823ep4goxf1.png?width=580&format=png&auto=webp&s=06175f31b093198e6bcdd2c6f0ae3e06b61ffe02 [](https://preview.redd.it/the-golden-treasure-part-ii-100-proof-apes-get-paid-v0-tatnyqsq1mxf1.png?width=580&format=png&auto=webp&s=f84c28ebaf364a05222fd80f561d86bc81420db0) 5. Devin Nunes \[Chair of the President's Intelligence Advisory Board\] Nunes, when he was working on combatting the naked shorting of President Trump's stock (DJT) in 2024, [used MMTLP as an example of another heavily manipulated naked shorted stock](https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1849635/000114036124021595/ny20026576x11_ex99-1.htm#:~:text=pre%2Dborrow%20logs.-,Such%20an%20inquiry%20is%20needed%20to%20protect%20shareholders%2C%20including%20TMTG's,Buchanan%20The%20Honorable%20Greg%20Steube) in a letter to the U.S House on Financial Services Committee: https://preview.redd.it/44fbqr46goxf1.png?width=1338&format=png&auto=webp&s=53d31ed892ae8defca8519cf9f3555c0e7fb2b0b [](https://preview.redd.it/the-golden-treasure-part-ii-100-proof-apes-get-paid-v0-gertan1s1mxf1.png?width=1338&format=png&auto=webp&s=483a5568ef81f0233b8fa9ef97f43cd5247cc657) Nunes, in particular, has beef with Citadel, who has naked shorted GME, MMTLP, and DJT. A spokesperson for Citadel Securities [even stated publicly](https://www.cnbc.com/2024/04/19/citadel-securities-blasts-trump-media-ceo-over-djt-short-sale-letter.html) that, “Devin Nunes is the proverbial loser who tries to blame ‘naked short selling’ for his falling stock price”. The company Nunes was previously CEO of, the current President's company (Trump Media) also fired back at Citadel Securities, stating: "**Citadel Securities, a corporate behemoth that has been fined and censured for an incredibly wide range of offenses including issues related to naked short selling, and is world famous for screwing over everyday retail investors at the behest of other corporations, is the last company on earth that should lecture anyone on ‘integrity.’**” That, by the way, already shows beef between the current Presidential Administration and Citadel, which is helpful for us, considering that we have a common enemy. 6. U.S President Trump Multiple sources have confirmed that President Trump is aware of MMTLP (which also makes sense considering Vice President Vance himself signed the MMTLP open letter to the SEC). Although Trump has not made any public announcements regarding MMTLP, because of the naked shorting of his own stock, in addition to the objectives of his backers (which I'll explain shortly), he would most certainly be incentivized to use MMTLP as an example to end the naked shorting of his company. Also, based on a credible source, which I'll also discuss, it seems that the President is indeed interested in a resolution. John Stubbins, Host of the radio show "Indivisible", while discussing subpoenas MMAT sent to Citadel et al., [did further confirm](https://x.com/busybrands/status/1980334129372893533) the President Trump is aware of MMTLP: https://reddit.com/link/1ohiz4y/video/8cng7xm7joxf1/player John Stubbins does have strong connections in the political field. He interviewed Former U.S National Security Advisor, General Michael Flynn last year. So, he is a credible source when he further confirms that the U.S President is aware of MMTLP. Also, in the video he discusses subpoenas sent out to Citadel, Virtu, the DTCC, and others by MMAT. That's because MMAT (the company MMTLP was a spinoff from) is also fighting back SHFs with subpoenas for trading data and short shares. Not everyone accepted the subpoenas. Citadel and friends are fighting them in court currently, so it would be pre-mature to say we've successfully uncovered smoking guns there, but these are subpoenas that have successfully been issued to multiple entities, and some of the entities are caving in while others are currently fighting to quash it. Either way, [MMAT is definitely on the offensive](https://x.com/palikaras/status/1897832722728390947): https://preview.redd.it/t8v93zp8goxf1.png?width=597&format=png&auto=webp&s=769b086e99aba1052e4370c5ac55ec07cbcd1266 [](https://preview.redd.it/the-golden-treasure-part-ii-100-proof-apes-get-paid-v0-qdvs8q0u1mxf1.png?width=597&format=png&auto=webp&s=9166f53d232afbfb4c45bde3bd2bbf69272fbf7c) I did notice in particular that a prominent shill that had consistently been bashing MMTLP and demeaning the community, Fox Business Network Senior Correspondent Charles Gasparino, [deleted every single post related to MMTLP](https://x.com/KarmaCollects/status/1915958851905720649) (which were negative posts towards MMTLP) on his social media a couple months after President Trump's inauguration. It's not entirely conclusive why he did it, but reasonable inferences can be made: https://preview.redd.it/9gvhl2x9goxf1.jpg?width=1241&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5a9e621d9ab60af424b687bb92358839ab403c96 [](https://preview.redd.it/the-golden-treasure-part-ii-100-proof-apes-get-paid-v0-9d5unj3w1mxf1.jpg?width=1241&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2983f0a28d57794eeaf47038c91405b62f31dd65) Now, regarding the support at the Executive Branch of the federal government, note that this is on the federal level. There's many other public officials at the federal, state, and local level that have also voiced support for a resolution. Furthermore, the Heritage Foundation, a strong backer/influencer of the current President and his policies (also known for its "Project 2025" initiative), [called for FINRA to be abolished](https://www.fa-mag.com/news/conservative-manifesto-project-25-says-finra-should-be-abolished-78740.html); this is one of their listed objectives. https://preview.redd.it/uvkb525cgoxf1.jpg?width=1241&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=38968c5462d3cdf4a987fb4935c7267aa02ac708 [](https://preview.redd.it/the-golden-treasure-part-ii-100-proof-apes-get-paid-v0-cep9pdwy1mxf1.jpg?width=1241&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7f38e4f965b47b0590b355c8c935f43d3c0dc133) Multiple shareholders, including lawyers fighting for a resolution, took FINRA to court, but failed every time because FINRA has "absolute immunity", which is a shield they've consistently used in court. FINRA even stated in a response to a shareholder's suit that even if what they did was illegal, they were protected by absolute immunity: https://preview.redd.it/n98rncnegoxf1.jpg?width=812&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=02becdda0e46e76782c366d27d7a55101ce592ff [](https://preview.redd.it/the-golden-treasure-part-ii-100-proof-apes-get-paid-v0-m0um68702mxf1.jpg?width=812&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0dbc6d2ac7ff02286fcf98085516b849980c4dc8) FINRA has been arguably the largest obstacle for a resolution (at least on the judiciary/legal side). If the Heritage Foundation accomplishes their objective of abolishing FINRA, that obstacle would completely disappear (excellent for MMTLP, GME, and shareholders of all naked shorted stocks). However, it appears that the Heritage Foundation may use the MMTLP situation as an excuse to demonstrate FINRA's incompetence and a perfectly good reason for why FINRA is useless and should be abolished, so there is definitely a mutually beneficial relationship there. The support at the Executive Branch is so strong that a highly credible source, a prominent MMTLP liaison with the Trump Administration, Kurtis, has stated that he's "extremely optimistic" about a favorable resolution. In a space call on "X" in October 2025, he went as far as to say that **there's going to be a favorable outcome to the MMTLP situation regardless of whether shareholders do anything at this point**. https://reddit.com/link/1ohiz4y/video/kg23hq15koxf1/player So, yes, the support for a resolution has never been stronger (much stronger than last year, and that was when 100+ members of Congress were demanding transparency from the SEC about MMTLP). And that shift in support compared to the previous Administration is clearly visible with the recent granting of FOIA requests. Regarding FOIA requests made by MMTLP shareholders since 2022, the only one granted in the beginning was the email from Sam Draddy from FINRA (posted in "Golden Treasure Part I") confirming that MMTLP was on their fraud radar and being bluesheeted. Apparently, the granting of that FOIA request was an accident of their part, **because after that email got out, virtually every single other FOIA request was getting denied**. I'll put this into perspective. according to "FOIAsearch.com", out of the 1,277 FOIA requests made, only 2 were granted in full (only approx. 0.157% of all requests were granted in full): https://preview.redd.it/rem8m2zggoxf1.png?width=1322&format=png&auto=webp&s=a0b3397220d98836f68d93019351db7371b42a57 [](https://preview.redd.it/the-golden-treasure-part-ii-100-proof-apes-get-paid-v0-34fnq4r12mxf1.png?width=1322&format=png&auto=webp&s=53bcf208b42a1971069ea7026750d4541b6b3e29) Fair to say that the MMTLP community was hitting a roadblock with the previous Administration regarding FOIA requests. But, with the advent of the new Administration, that appears to have changed, because FOIA requests related to MMTLP have started getting granted again. FOIA requests relating to electronic communications sent by [Gary Gensler](https://x.com/NicholasRaia2/status/1920134505496502358) and [Hester Pierce](https://x.com/NicholasRaia2/status/1979211147699245422) around the time MMTLP was U3 Halted by FINRA in December 2022 were recently granted, and they demonstrate that there were an "unusual" number of meetings and requests to chat right before the stock got halted due to extraordinary events, further confirming that there was most certainly a lot going on behind the scenes that shareholders didn't see. These text messages specifically said that there was "a lot going on", and a few weeks before MMTLP was scheduled to go private and shorts were supposed to close (before MMTLP was U3 Halted), Gensler told Pierce that there was an "emerging matter" that they needed to talk about: https://reddit.com/link/1ohiz4y/video/pve5k1ewjoxf1/player What's also important here is that **these FOIA requests never would've been approved by the previous administration**. So, you can see with your own eyes that the New Administration is significantly more supportive than the previous one (especially taking into account the SEC announced the retirement of Chief Operating Officer Ken Johnson, the guy that was essentially rejecting all the previous FOIA requests). Another highly critical piece of information that can be derived from the FOIA release of Gensler's emails are that they [completely contradict the SEC OIT's](https://www.sec.gov/files/sec-oig-review-587-2025.pdf) (Office of Information Technology) January 2024 report to the Office of Inspector General that Gensler's text messages between October 18, 2022- September 6, 2023 were "inadvertently deleted". https://preview.redd.it/tpfmib3jgoxf1.png?width=1275&format=png&auto=webp&s=91861187ae9da85b0c99ae05cde0c0dbf684b0be [](https://preview.redd.it/the-golden-treasure-part-ii-100-proof-apes-get-paid-v0-bvdsfui32mxf1.png?width=1275&format=png&auto=webp&s=58999a4db9e7785685e3352cf573d4becdf41383) It was also [reported by Yahoo Finance](https://finance.yahoo.com/news/sec-loses-nearly-gary-gensler-100215746.html) in relation to MMTLP: https://preview.redd.it/43qiccwjgoxf1.png?width=1242&format=png&auto=webp&s=59ed91def82cd3b51cba46d8e7a274fcff2db86b [](https://preview.redd.it/the-golden-treasure-part-ii-100-proof-apes-get-paid-v0-bz3ue6wg2mxf1.png?width=1242&format=png&auto=webp&s=99087f506f500291c29ec8c8ada36ac256f7231e) Well, guess what, the New Presidential Administration just threw the previous SEC Chair and Admin under the bus, because the granted FOIAs indisputably prove that was a blatant lie from the SEC OIT trying to cover their tracks. This reinforces the high degrees of optimism for a resolution via the Executive Branch by the credible sources mentioned. It does look like when the resolution for MMTLP does come, that Former SEC Chair Gary Gensler will end up being the fall guy (or at least one of the fall guys). So where does this all leave GME? Upon a resolution to MMTLP, GME will be in the prime position for MOASS. ———————————————————————————————————————————————— **§3: Post-Resolution Opens Gates for GME Resolution** At this point, I shouldn't have to explain how much of a juggernaut Gamestop's position is. The company is insanely undervalued [based on the cash on hand alone](https://www.sec.gov/ix?doc=/Archives/edgar/data/1326380/000132638025000075/gme-20250802.htm). Even if you disregard the cash raised from the convertible notes, GameStop has several billions in net cash. And the warrants were a win-win for shareholders as well as GameStop, because next time this stock has a run up, every warrant that gets executed is extra profits for GameStop. GameStop could theoretically make nearly $2 billion extra in profits from the warrants alone. This company can't go bankrupt; hence, SHFs are trapped. They're not shorting GME to make money like in 2020. They're shorting because they need to survive. If they don't short GME, they'll end up bankrupt, so it's a losing game for them. It's not like with other basket stocks, where the companies are struggling with debt and SHFs can bankrupt them to avoid closing their shorts. There's no out, and this is exactly why you see the market cap is insanely low compared to the cash on hand. **The average company on the Russell 1000 has a market cap around 10x of its cash on hand (and that's a conservative estimate)**. You don't have to take my word for it. Go search up companies on the Russell 1000, and you'll see that their cash on hand is a fraction of their market cap. Whereas GameStop's market cap is around 1.2x cash on hand (around 2x if you want to exclude the convertible notes/liabilities). It's extremely undervalued, and everyone here knows why. But, when MMTLP gets resolved, it sets a precedent. We'll have a a blueprint for a resolution (which we may not even need). I created a general diagram to explain how MMTLP will ultimately affect GME post-resolution ([feel free to go through it if you'd like](https://imgur.com/Lv1vKGz)). The current President is confirmed to (1) have beef with Citadel, (2) have problems with his own stock being naked shorted by SHFs, and (3) have backers that want regulatory agencies held accountable, or even abolished \[referring to FINRA\]. This is the perfect time where the stars are aligning, and if MMTLP gets a settlement, if the MMTLP synthetics get exposed, the same can absolutely happen for GME. The gates open for us. If anything, GME may be next in line after MMTLP gets a settlement, because of the history, the massive army of shareholders, and national attention this stock has already received in the past. We are in an extremely good position. And I am confident that once this stock is resolved via a settlement, it will expose the naked shorts problem infesting the market, and at that point everyone will begin looking at GME and securing a settlement as well. See you on the moon! 🦍🚀🌑

--- **Disclaimer:** I enlisted ChatGPT to help organize my thoughts and structure them so that they aren't so schizophernic. The message remains unchanged—just refined for clarity. Enjoy the EM dashes. --- Alright degenerates, gather ‘round. This is the post-mortem for the analysis the mods couldn’t handle. --- Mods have restored [the original post](https://www.reddit.com/r/WallStreetbetsELITE/s/vE92FUaF1Q). All future addena and analysis will be posted here. --- **21.5k upvotes. 4.8 million views. 3.3k comments. 7.5k shares. 4 awards.** Then? **Deleted. No rule cited. No DM. No “tone it down.” Just gone.** Why? Because I said what the markets won’t: **The Fed blinked. China and Canada are holding the detonator. And the U.S. Treasury market—the holy grail of global finance—isn’t bulletproof anymore.** **Let’s recap:** * **Japan started quietly dumping Treasuries.** Data from Japan's Ministry of Finance indicates that Japanese investors were net sellers of foreign bonds in the week ending April 5, 2025, marking a significant shift in their investment behavior. [www.fxstreet.com](https://www.fxstreet.com/news/japans-kato-says-will-not-sell-us-treasury-holdings-just-from-standpoint-of-us-japan-relations-202504090051) * **China responded to tariffs by not escalating—a silence that screamed “we’re ready.”** China's measured response to the U.S. tariffs suggests strategic positioning rather than immediate retaliation. [www.theguardian.com](https://www.theguardian.com/business/2025/apr/09/dramatic-sell-off-of-us-government-bonds-as-tariff-war-panic-deepens) * **Japan, South Korea, and China began coordinating trade and financial policy.** Reports indicate that these nations have engaged in discussions to align their economic strategies in response to U.S. trade policies. [www.reuters.com](https://www.reuters.com/world/japan/japans-ruling-camp-call-sales-tax-cut-yomiuri-reports-2025-04-10/) * **Canada issued a $3.5B USD bond, signaled reserve repositioning, and quietly hinted at coordinated selling.** Mark Carney didn’t even have to raise his voice—just moved a piece on the board and let the pressure rise. [www.snopes.com/](https://www.snopes.com/news/2025/04/11/canada-mark-carney-treasurys-sell-off/) * **Bond yields exploded. Liquidity evaporated.** The yield on the 30-year U.S. Treasury bond briefly surpassed 5%, reaching levels not seen since late 2023, signaling a significant drop in demand. [www.theguardian.com](https://www.theguardian.com/business/2025/apr/09/dramatic-sell-off-of-us-government-bonds-as-tariff-war-panic-deepens) * **The Fed muttered, “we’ll stabilize markets if needed.”** This statement indicates the Federal Reserve's readiness to intervene in the markets to maintain stability amid the volatility. [www.theaustralian.com.au](https://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/how-the-bond-market-scared-trump-into-action/news-story/6b1db0612fbd5cfcbbc1cb5e313d1ecc) All of this points to one thing: **This is no longer about interest rates or inflation. This is a trust war.** And trust—not tanks—is what backs the U.S. dollar. **Here’s what I didn’t get to post:** **The infrastructure broke.** The system cracked under the pressure. According to [Risk.net](http://Risk.net), over $2 trillion in U.S. Treasuries were traded per day during the height of the tariff fallout—double the average daily volume. [www.risk.net (Paywalled)](https://www.risk.net/risk-management/7961376/treasury-selloff-challenges-back-office-systems) FIS and Trading Technologies—core post-trade platforms used by major brokerages—experienced significant processing delays due to the unprecedented trade volumes. This wasn’t Reddit lagging under upvotes. This was the **clearing layer of the bond market going offline.** That’s the nightmare: A liquidity shock colliding with a back-office failure. It creates a bottleneck that spirals into **margin calls, repo freezes, counterparty chaos**, and then— *maybe*—an actual market halt. And what happened right after? **A surprise tariff exemption.** **Which brings me to the biggest tell of all: the walkback.** Trump spent days imposing 125% tariffs. Then suddenly: **He backs off. Quietly. Subtly. A pause. A delay. A face-saving half-reversal.** [content.govdelivery.com](https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/USDHSCBP/bulletins/3db9e55) **Why?** Because **the bond market screamed.** Because **Japan’s selling worked.** Because **the Treasury floor buckled—and the White House blinked.** That tariff exemption **validates everything**: * If the tariffs were effective, there would be no need to flinch. * If China, Japan, or others weren’t leveraging their holdings, there’d be no fear. * If the Treasury market wasn’t exposed, the Fed wouldn’t have signaled intervention. This was a **geopolitical stress test**—and the U.S. didn’t pass. It limped across the finish line. **So what now?** This is the **foundation** under your economy catching fire. And the Fed just checked the beams and heard them **hollow.** If you missed the original post, I’ve reuploaded it onto my profile [An idiot's Reddit profile](https://www.reddit.com/user/TheMysteryCheese/comments/1jxxss9/the_fed_just_blinked_china_is_about_to_nuke_the/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1). If you’re a mod, just admit it rattled you. Don’t pretend it was “low effort” or “off-topic.” **You know exactly what this was.** **If I’m wrong? Great. I’m an idiot with a flair for drama.** **But if I’m right?** I'll reiterate Tick. Fucking. Tock. --- Edit: To save me responding to all the "braindead/CCP cope/OP is an idiot" comments: >Cool, go buy calls about it then. Also, for everyone else: >Don't take me at face value, try and prove me wrong, then invest based on how well you feel you did. --- Addendum: Consumer Credit Collapse As u/couchsurfinggonepro rightly highlighted, I still managed to leave out a key point: the high risk of credit default at the consumer level. Despite the tribal noise in politics, here’s the truth: Most people are financially exhausted. COVID didn’t just disrupt—it indebted. And while the headlines talk about jobs and inflation, the only real debate in Washington was: who gets bailed out and how? Trump’s “solution” is now playing out. And what it will unleash is: -Mass unemployment -Mortgage defaults -Credit card delinquencies -Student loan defaults -Personal bankruptcies There is a bubble in personal consumer debt --- Addendum 2: Margin Calls and Domestic Liquidity Fragility u/im_a_squishy_ai built on the analysis above, it’s not just foreign selling that's stressing the bond market—the domestic side is breaking too. Margin calls started going out to hedge funds on the first Thursday and Friday of the selloff. These weren’t triggered by any deep fundamental devaluation of equities—they were triggered simply because valuations reverted to a historical norm. >Stocks fell to 15–20x forward earnings—which is textbook fair value. That’s not a crash. That’s a mean reversion. And yet, it triggered margin calls. That tells us something: Hedge funds are so over-leveraged that even a return to normal valuations creates a liquidity crisis. There is no buffer. There is no margin for error. No resilience. This means this is another bubble—plain and simple. A structurally fragile one. As the real economy begins to absorb job losses, business failures, declining earnings, and reduced consumer demand—all natural consequences of the tariff and credit tightening cycle—those margin calls are going to accelerate. The market has already shown its hand: >Just normalizing destabilizes it. But we’re not heading for normal. We’re heading for a deterioration. And that means the next wave of selling won’t be orderly—it’ll be forced. Liquidations. Defaults. Fire sales. --- Addendum 3: The Commercial Real Estate Time Bomb u/Pietes highlighted another structural fault line we need to talk about, commercial real estate—and specifically the overvaluation and fragility of REITs. Most commercial real estate isn’t bought outright. It’s acquired using loan-like financing structures, often leveraged against stock-based collateral or a fragile web of interconnected property portfolios. It’s a Jenga tower of credit assumptions—and all it takes is one piece to wobble. REITs (Real Estate Investment Trusts) are the largest holders of both commercial and residential real estate in the U.S. They are heavily dependent on valuation stability and rental yield expectations—both of which are at risk in the current macro environment. In a scenario of rising rates, job losses, and liquidity-driven asset fire sales, REITs become amplifiers of systemic risk. If the market faces renewed margin calls, and REIT valuations slip even modestly, their leverage unwinds If property vacancies rise from business closures or consumer retrenchment, their cash flows evaporate And if broader financial players start selling REITs or their underlying mortgage-backed assets to meet liquidity demands, we’re looking at contagion across multiple sectors In short: REITs are sitting on illiquid assets funded by borrowed optimism. In a liquidity crunch, optimism is the first thing to vanish. --- Addendum 4 : The Domestic Bank Run As per u/Boobpocket on my original post: https://www.reddit.com/r/WallStreetbetsELITE/s/2LMdR3Z3AQ The recent policy move to freeze immigrant bank accounts is a potential flashpoint—and one that could blindside the financial system. If even a fraction of the 15+ million account holders rush to withdraw their funds in fear of asset seizure or financial isolation, it could trigger a silent bank run. This isn’t a regional bank failure or a crypto contagion. This is distributed, fragmented, and unpredictable—across every major bank and financial institution in the country. You’re talking about: Mass withdrawals Liquidity pressures Forced reserve drawdowns Potential failures of smaller or mid-tier institutions And a surge in cash hoarding and offshore transfers that destabilizes confidence in retail banking itself It doesn’t matter whether the policy gets enforced. The fear alone, the signal it sends can do the damage. --- Addendum 5: Trump Walks Back the Tariff Exemptions—Sort Of - 13th of April There’s not much meat to this one yet, but it’s worth noting: Trump just called the U.S. Customs and Border Protection's own tariff guidance update—the one that signaled a soft exemption for Chinese chip imports—“fake news” on Truth Social. > Yes, he’s calling his own administration’s federal directive fake. Make of that what you will. Is it a power struggle inside the executive? A tactic to confuse markets? Or just another moment of chaos-as-strategy? Whatever it is, it reintroduces uncertainty into a market that has barely begun to stabilize. [The Washington Post](https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2025/04/13/tariffs-chips-lutnick/) --- Addendum 6: China Halts Exports of Rare Earth Minerals - 13th of April China just put the brakes on one of the most strategically vital trade flows in the modern economy: rare earth minerals and magnets. > “It will take 45 days before export licenses could be issued and exports... would resume,” —Michael Silver, CEO of American Elements (via [New York Times](https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/13/business/china-rare-earths-exports.html)) This move can be read two ways—and both are bad for the U.S.: 1. It’s a flex. China is leveraging its chokehold on critical materials—used in everything from EVs to military hardware—to apply economic pressure in response to tariffs and bond hostility. 2. It’s a mirror. China is reminding the world that they are the factory, the mine, and the magnet. This isn’t just retaliation. It’s a demonstration of structural leverage. They don’t need to escalate. They just need to remind everyone how replaceable the U.S. is in the supply chain, and how irreplaceable China remains. Either way, this is a strategic maneuver, not a tantrum. And it just added more fuel to an already burning trust crisis in the U.S. financial leadership. --- Addendum 7: Subprime Auto Loans u/ClicheCrime brings up the subprime auto loan industry, currently operating on borrowed time and collapsing collateral. Car values are plummeting as supply chain normalization floods the used market. Borrowers are underwater on high-interest loans, many with zero equity. Defaults are climbing, repo rates are spiking, and entire ABS (asset-backed securities) chains are quietly fraying. This is 2008 subprime mortgages, but on wheels and with no bailout narrative. Cars aren’t just assets. They’re lifelines. In much of the U.S., no car means no job. There’s no public transport net to catch these people. So what happens when millions lose access to work, default, and spiral into personal insolvency? No car, no job. No job, no payments. No payments, no stability. [www.creditchronometer.com](https://www.creditchronometer.com/subprime-auto-is-there-a-bad-moon-on-the-rise) --- Addendum 8: Foreign Pensions Begin Pullback from U.S. Equities - 14th of April On April 14, reports emerged that major Danish and Canadian pension funds are actively reassessing and, in some cases, reducing their investments in U.S. equities due to escalating geopolitical tensions and market instability. - Denmark's PFA, the country's largest pension fund, has been reducing its overweight in equities over the past month, citing increasing uncertainty stemming from recent trade policies and market volatility . - Canadian pension funds are also pausing new investments in U.S. private markets, expressing concerns over the current economic climate and policy unpredictability . These moves are significant. Pension funds are typically long-term investors, and such shifts indicate a growing unease about the stability of U.S. markets. The potential ripple effects include: Reduced foreign capital inflows into U.S. equities, potentially leading to decreased market liquidity. Increased volatility as large institutional investors adjust their portfolios. Pressure on asset valuations, particularly if the trend of divestment continues. This development underscores the importance of monitoring institutional investment behaviors, as they can serve as early indicators of broader market sentiment shifts. [Financial Times - Paywalled](https://www.ft.com/content/6eea2278-556a-4395-9f6a-42cf2c6c2363) --- Addendum 9: Yellen Just Sounded the Alarm - 14th of April U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen has now publicly acknowledged what this thread has been screaming for days: > “The selloff in Treasuries is very worrisome, especially in light of Trump’s tariff policies.” —Yellen, via [The Hill](https://thehill.com/business/5247789-yellen-dollar-based-assets-trump-tariff-policies/) The top financial officer in the United States just admitted the core pillar of American finance—its ability to sell debt—is under threat. Not due to inflation. Not due to organic rate shifts. But due to policy-induced trust collapse. Yellen specifically pointed to: Dollar-based assets losing appeal Tariffs as a destabilizing force The need to reassure foreign holders of U.S. debt This is no longer a fringe take. This is no longer speculative. This is Treasury-confirmed systemic risk. And if she’s going public with it, you can bet the internal data looks even worse. --- Addendum 10: China Is Building New Export Markets - 14th of April On April 14, President Xi Jinping began a high-level tour of Southeast Asia, starting with Vietnam—formally aimed at "regional cooperation," but practically a geoeconomic pivot away from U.S. dependency. > The visit, [planned for weeks](https://www.reuters.com/world/vietnam-host-china-eu-leaders-coming-weeks-amid-us-tariff-risks-sources-say-2025-04-02/) and part of a wider trip in Southeast Asia, comes as Beijing faces 145% U.S. duties, while [Vietnam is negotiating](https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/us-vietnam-agree-launch-trade-deal-talks-tariffs-paused-2025-04-10/) a reduction of threatened [U.S. tariffs](https://www.reuters.com/business/tariffs/) of 46% that would otherwise apply in July after a global moratorium expires.” —[Reuters](https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/chinas-xi-meet-vietnam-leaders-kick-off-southeast-asia-tour-amid-us-tariffs-2025-04-14/) This isn’t a courtesy call. It’s a strategic rerouting of export flow. And Vietnam, already a rising player in global manufacturing and trade logistics, is a perfect staging ground. What this signals: China is not bluffing. Other markets are eager to absorb what the U.S. is pushing away. The old global order—U.S.-centered, dollar-settled—is being actively re-engineered. China doesn’t need to match tariffs with tariffs. It just needs to build alternatives—and that’s exactly what it’s doing. --- Addendum 11: The Fed’s Independence Is on the Chopping Block - 14th of April On April 14, it was confirmed that the White House will begin interviewing candidates for the next Federal Reserve Chair—months ahead of schedule. > “The White House will start interviewing candidates for the next Fed Chair this fall.” —[Reuters](https://www.reuters.com/world/us/bessent-says-white-house-will-start-interviewing-candidates-next-fed-chair-this-2025-04-14/) Let’s not play coy: this isn’t just succession planning. It’s the next phase of institutional capture. The Trump administration has made it clear—through both action and pattern—that it intends to fill the Fed with loyalists, not technocrats. Past appointments have been: -Underqualified -Short-lived -Routinely replaced by deeper loyalists when they showed even a shred of autonomy This isn’t about rates. It’s about control over monetary levers in a time of financial strain. What this signals to the world: -U.S. monetary policy is no longer independent -Market signals may be overridden by political needs -The one institution still holding credibility with global investors is now up for grabs (don't forget that foreign leaders can openly bring DJT through his crypto and golden visa schemes) Expect international confidence in U.S. debt and the dollar to deteriorate further, not just because of market signals—but because the referee is being replaced by the player. This isn’t just about inflation targeting or QT timelines. This is about the collapse of central bank legitimacy in real time. --- Addendum 12: U.S. Power Projection No Longer Feared - 16th of April In a rare and sobering admission, U.S. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has confirmed what many outside the Pentagon have only speculated: the U.S. military’s strategic dominance is no longer guaranteed. In an interview, Hegseth stated that China’s hypersonic missile arsenal is capable of sinking all ten U.S. aircraft carriers within twenty minutes of conflict. This directly challenges the very foundation of U.S. power projection, which has, for decades, relied on carrier strike groups to enforce diplomatic and economic influence across the globe. Hegseth went further, admitting that the United States “loses to China in every war game” currently run by the Pentagon. He characterized China’s military buildup not as defensive, but as explicitly designed to destroy the United States in a direct conflict. The failure, he claimed, lies within the U.S. military-industrial bureaucracy itself—too slow, too politicized, and too bloated to compete with China's rapid and strategically coherent expansion. This isn't just a military problem. The credibility of U.S. deterrence underwrites the credibility of the U.S. dollar, the safety of U.S. Treasuries, and the assumption of global economic stability. If the world no longer believes the U.S. can protect trade routes, enforce treaties, or credibly deter a peer conflict, then the financial architecture built atop that assumption begins to wobble. What Yellen hinted at in her comments about declining confidence in dollar-based assets, Hegseth has now echoed in military terms: the U.S. is no longer seen as untouchable. The psychological moat that protected American hegemony is drying up in real time. [Yahoo news](https://www.yahoo.com/news/china-could-sink-entire-us-100124996.html) --- This is my final update. There are too many signals, too much news, and I simply can't keep up. Everything I am seeing reinforces my analysis, and it has gone on to become a mainstream talking point. I appreciate the awards, updoots, and comments. I highly encourage people to start watching the news extremely closely over the coming weeks and / or months. I'll still be in the comments, so if there is something you think I missed, please feel free to post it. ---

I answered this question in a comment, but as it got more complicated I decided it was better to put into an *extremely* long post. Thanks for anyone that reads it. The comment was an answer to the post asking if token based billing (TBB) is the true cost of AI. The answer is a resounding **no**. In fact, not only is it not the true cost, there is no conceivable path to profitability, even given the most lenient case to the industry. Below is the explanation. (Admittedly, the title is a bit clickbait-y, but I figure I'd have some fun.) # Introduction To summarize, the profitability of AI must come from the profitability of inference. Specifically, their profit can be calculated as Inference Revenue (IR) - Training Costs (TC) - Other CapEx. Since IR is the only source of revenue, it's sufficient to see if this can be net-positive. For the sake of this argument, we will be as **lenient** as possible and show that profitability still remains unattainable. Each case of leniency will be marked with a letter (ex. \[1\]) In the case of TBB, IR revenue is revenue per million tokens ($/MT) - Cost/MT. LLMs are charged by input tokens and output tokens. The reason that output tokens cost more, is that frontier models use 'chain of thought' reasoning, which involves making other calls to the model before outputting a result. As a result, output tokens are typically charged at a multiple of input tokens. However, as the length of chain of thought reasoning (like all LLM calls) are non-deterministic, the amount of tokens they burn is indeterminate. (Edit 3: Technically, input tokens are processed in parallel whereas output tokens are processed sequentially as well. However this is an simplifying assumption so to not model complex GPU execution dynamics, ultimately something in their favor.) **\[1\]** However, we will assume that the price for output tokens is accurate in the bulk average, and so conclude that if *input* token revenue is net positive, TBB is net positive. That is to say, TBB is profitable if and only if (Input) Token Revenue > Token Cost. # The Cost of Tokens The cost tokens can be broken down as follows: 1. Electricity cost/MT 2. GPU price amortized over a set time. 3. Data center construction and maintenance cost amortized over a set time. The first two are self explanatory, however the third needs to be included as inference providers also need to make money to pay back their interest on loans used to finance the data center build out, and so naturally that business needs to generate positive profit. **\[2\]** However, for leniency we will assume that these businesses are willing to operate at break even for AI labs. ## Amortization Period There are two periods we are concerned about, the GPU and data center construction and maintenance cost. The GPUs are NVIDIA B200s. These were [announced at GTC 2024](https://www.guru3d.com/story/nvidia-b200-and-gb200-ai-gpus-technical-overview-unveiled-at-gtc-2024/), and the next-generation Vera Rubins were [announced at GTC 2026](https://tech-insider.org/nvidia-vera-rubin-platform-gtc-2026-rubin-r100-gpu/), so we would normally argue that we should amortize over two years. **\[3\]** However, for leniency, let us assume that B200s remain valuable for the AI industry for one extra year, so 3 years. Data center costs can be deconstructed into CapEx (land procurement, electrical, networking, cooling hardware and installation), and OpEx, the electricity cost, general maintenance and purchasing of new equipment. The CapEx costs are estimated at [$9M to $15M per MW of IT load](https://www.alpha-matica.com/post/deconstructing-the-data-center-a-look-at-the-cost-structure-1), and let us assume their creditors will allow **\[4\]** 10 years before they request a **single interest payment** even though loan deals at best require [interest loan payments for 2-3 years](https://commercialloandirect.com/data-center-construction-financing-2026). Additionally, **\[5\]** we will ignore purchasing of new equipment for leniency, e.g. Vera Rubin racks are not the same as Blackwell racks, so this necessitates a new purchase. ## Amortized Costs We can now take the prices and divide them over the period. For now, we will get units in dollars per hour. An NVL72 rack, commonly installed in hyperscalar facilities, contains 72 B200 GPUs, priced at [ $2.8M - $3.4M](https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/artificial-intelligence/price-of-nvidias-vera-rubin-nvl72-racks-skyrockets-to-as-much-as-usd8-8-million-apiece-but-server-makers-margins-will-be-tight-nvidia-is-moving-closer-to-shipping-entire-full-scale-systems) per rack. **\[6\]** Let us take the lowest number, $2.8M, leading to a ($2.8M/72)= $38.9K cost per GPU. Spread over three years (26280 hours), we have $1.48/hr. For data centers, let us assume that **\[7\]** we once again take the lowest of two numbers ($9M), and divide over 5 years (43800 hours), which is $205.48/MW IT load/hr. Converting to kW, it's $0.21/hr per kW IT Load. This gives us two numbers: 1. GPU: $1.48/hr 2. Data Center: $0.21/hr per kW IT Load. Each B200 GPU is running at 1.2kW, we say the normalized cost of a GPU is: >(1) GPU/Data Center Cost: $1.48 + $0.21 \* 1.2 = $1.73/hr. Let us keep in mind this is a *ridiculously generous estimate.* # Estimating Tokens/Hour Unfortunately, these numbers are not in the right units for to compare $/MT revenue. Beyond electricity pricing, (which is covered later), we need to know how long a GPU runs to generate 1MT, so first we will look at number of tokens in an hour. Unfortunately, this is not an trivial calculation as the actual runtime to compute one token is not fixed. This is due to GPU concurrency, where GPUs can execute user requests in parallel. There are a huge amount of details here, but we will be relatively generous, to simplify the calculation. ## NVIDIA Benchmarks **\[8\]** The following sources are from NVIDIA themselves, so these will be idealized numbers. In general, real workloads are unable to get full performance due to many different factors. (Source: I have written CUDA kernels for scientific computing.) In short, the TPS of a GPU is not fixed, and depends largely on number of users allocated to the GPU. 1. B200s, running Llama 4 Maverick, which has 400B parameters, can get [1000 TPS/user and 72000 TPS/server](https://developer.nvidia.com/blog/blackwell-breaks-the-1000-tps-user-barrier-with-metas-llama-4-maverick/). (TPS = tokens per second). 2. B200s, running Llama 3.3 70B, which has 70B parameters, can get [50 TPS/user and 10000 TPS/GPU](https://developer.nvidia.com/blog/blackwell-breaks-the-1000-tps-user-barrier-with-metas-llama-4-maverick/). For case 1, a 1000 TPS was achieved over 8 GPUs, meaning concurrency was 1/8. Let us normalize to 250 TPS. The reason for this is because 400B parameters cannot fit onto one GPU, **\[9\]** however, we will ignore this and allow a normalized per GPU estimate, that is assuming any user request can *always* fit onto one GPU, even though this is known to be **false.** Typically frontier LLM models are evaluated using a MoE (Mixture of Experts) method, typically meaning computing using a subset (say 5%-10% -> 7.5%) of models parameters. In other words, in case 1 we expect the GPU to computing a 30B parameter model, handled at concurrency of 1 user. In case 2, the concurrency is 200 users, at a 70B which they say is not using MoE ("all parameters are utilized simultaneously for inference"). ## TPS/GPU Estimation We will use these two data points to estimate TPS as a function of concurrency at a *specific* parameter count, and apply linear scaling for other parameters. The compute cost of models by parameter scales linearly, so to normalize case 1 to 70B, we would expect case 1 running 70B parameters to be (30/70\*250) = 107 TPS/GPU. We would expect the TPS/GPU to saturate (say at 12000 TPS/GPU) as number of users goes up, logistically. Letting **u** be concurrent users (users - 1), assuming 70B parameters, we can fit a graph: [An estimated graph of TPS\/GPU at 70B, fit assuming upper half logistic growth, where Case 1 is assumed be the midpoint of the logistic curve, and saturation occurs at 12000, \(20&#37; more than Case 2\). ](https://preview.redd.it/71msfx95ty5h1.png?width=935&format=png&auto=webp&s=6a21cbeb34b2e8b391ae88483305c029538f223d) For reference, the above graph is TPS\_70(u) = 23893/(1+e\^{-0.0119x})-11893. Now, as compute scales linearly, the TPS(u, p), where p is computed parameters (in billions) is: >(2) TPS(u, p) = TPS\_70(u) \* (70 / p). Additionally, SPT(u,p) = 1/TPS(u, p) the inverse, seconds per token. We can now say that a GPU has 3600 TPS(u, p) tokens per hour so, the cost of tokens (not including electricity) from (1): >(3) GPU/Data Center Cost: $1.73/hr / (3600 TPS(u, p)) = 0.00048 SPT(u, p) $/Token = 480.55 SPT(u, p) $/MT. ## Electricity Estimation Industrial electricity costs tend to be priced differently than residential costs. In the US, they vary by state, and **\[10\]** we will take the *lowest* cost for our calculation, which was [4.68 cents per kWh in Washington](https://info.siteselectiongroup.com/blog/power-in-the-data-center-and-its-costs-across-the-united-states), in 2017. The inflation of electricity in Washington appears to be [14.1%](https://www.priceofelectricity.com/electricity-price-history/washington), so projecting to 2024 (B200 release) suggests the cost of industrial electricity would be 11.78 cents per kWh. We will say as B200s 1.2kW and 150W for "half" of the Grace CPU (2 GPUs, 1 CPU per GB200), it runs at 1.35kW. **\[11\]** Of course, in reality the entire NVL72 cluster is rated for 132kW, which is 1.8kW per GPU, normalized. But let's be even more nice. We can then say the $/MT is: >(4) 10\^6 SPT(u, p) / (3600 s/hr) \* 1.35kW \* 11.78 cents kWh = 44.18 SPT(u, p) $/MT. # Inference Costs in $/MT In total we have: >(5) Inference(u, p) = 524.73 SPT(u, p) $/MT. That is, we observe the inference cost as a function of concurrent users and parameters. So, let us observe a sample frontier model, like Claude Opus 4.7 or GPT-5.5, which estimated to have 4T parameters. After \~7.5% MoE, we would have 300B parameters. [Inference costs per million tokens as function of concurrent users. From bottom to top, the curve is drawn for models computing 100, 200, 300, 400, and 500 billion parameters. ](https://preview.redd.it/7wt2jj4f1z5h1.png?width=865&format=png&auto=webp&s=5e613d4eb38fbdc3ed0001e9935e26a4a54c70ac) Now, some AI boosters might look at the graph and show how after 20 concurrent users, Claude Opus or GPT 5.5 is under a dollar! Therefore it must be profitable, since you turned a blind eye to the nice lenient treatment. But, unfortunately, this is not even close to the case. ## Full Concurrency is Impossible Currently the US has access to around [10GW (graph of current capacity, approximately summed over columns)](https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/charting-data-center-development-roadmap-key-us-states-2026-01-22/) of IT load capacity. NVIDIA in 2024 sold [$210B of NVL72 servers](https://www.trendforce.com/news/2024/07/26/news-gb200-ai-servers-generate-usd-210-billion-annual-revenue-boosting-supply-chain-growth/), corresponding to **\[12\]** (now using the higher number for racks, to allow this number to be smaller) 61764 NVL72 servers, which at 132kW is 8GW. So, it seems reasonable to say 8GW of capacity is dedicated to these racks. This comes to \~4.45 million B200 GPUs. Therefore, for us to argue that an inference provider prices at a concurrency of 20 users, we need (4.45M \* 20) = 88.95M TBB paid users 24/7 never stopping, maximizing their usage, constantly. Using the numbers that OpenAI and Anthropic have claimed, (which are *very* trustworthy), OpenAI has recently has reached [50M paid subscribers and 9M business users](https://theoutpost.ai/news-story/chat-gpt-reaches-900-million-weekly-active-users-as-open-ai-secures-110-billion-funding-round-24188/), while Anthropic has [18-30M paid users](https://techcrunch.com/2026/03/28/anthropics-claude-popularity-with-paying-consumers-is-skyrocketing/). Together, they **\[13\]**, assuming the maximum number here, have 80M which is less than the 88.95M required to have full concurrency, and that's *assuming* these users are addicted to AI 24/7 and never eat or sleep. The average white collar job lasts for 8 hours (1/3) of a day **\[14\]** so let's say these paid users are spending their entire working lives (including weekends!) using Claude or ChatGPT, and it lines up that we still get full concurrency. This means there are 26.66M users spread scross 4.45 million GPUs, which means if *every user is allocated perfectly*, we have 6 people per GPU! Following the graph, this means Claude Opus 4.7 or GPT-5.5 would cost (with this nice lenient estimate) $4.22/MT. They currently are both charged at $5/MT, which after corporate tax of 21% in the US and state taxes, it means they *could* be just about breaking even! Wow! ## Unpaid Users Now, some may quibble that the presence of free users somehow will add to this concurrency, and so it''s *actually* making money! However, this means the gains from concurrency needs to outpace the tokens that *aren't* being going to paid customers. Let's do an example. Let's say there are 200 concurrent users, 6 of which are paid users. At this rate, it is $0.22/MT. Unfortunately, since only 6/200 are paying users, 194MT was unpaid, which cost $42.68. And, at $5/MT, only $30 of revenue was earned, meaning there would be a net loss of $12.68 (before tax). ## More Data Centers is Worse Currently there many data centers planned due to be built. This is because they say the tech CEOs claim overwhelming AI demand. But supposing they even double the current amount of GPUs, this drops the concurrency even more. However, they say there is a compute crisis, which suggests the following scenarios: 1. Concurrency is not remotely achievable at the theoretical level NVIDIA reports, so we have low TPS. 2. Free users are taking up most of the compute, which ends up at a *worse* loss for the companies. In both cases, more data centers exacerbates this issue. Which means with more data centers AI companies **lose more money**. # Final Words Throughout this very *very* long post, there were a total of 14 points of leniency towards the AI companies. Even with that leniency, it is **deeply** not in their favor. Notably, the cost of electricity is only 8.42% of the inference cost (from (4) and (5)). This means the other 91.58% comes from the data center construction and GPU purchase amortization. (Remember, this is a minimum, as many nice choices were made.) This means in a real world scenario, where we remove these lenient points, that even if **electricity were free**, AI can *never* be profitable at its current costs. Even if NVIDIA chips could suddenly compute tokens instantaneously, AI *cannot* be profitable. It doesn't matter if you build 1 trillion data centers, have the world's cheapest energy, and the best chips from the future. For it to be profitable, NVIDIA would have to sell their GPUs for cheap and data centers would need to be cheap to build. Unfortunately, neither of these cases can happen, or they would have to **raise prices drastically.** However, that necessarily decreases demand. And then to be profitable they would need to make back their initial investment. I would love to model this as well and give the conditions under which it could, however this post has gotten far *far* too long already. So, there is only one conclusion, and I am willing to say that: **The current AI industry can never be profitable. This industry is over. There is no path to profitability, nothing. No IPO, no marketing, no innovation can save them.** TL;DR The bulk of the cost of inference comes not from electricity but the cost of data center construction and GPU purchases. These are amortized over certain periods, and even with very lenient assumptions, inference is not able to be profitable at these costs. Significantly higher prices would cause drops in demand (as we already are seeing today). GPU concurrency also makes it so more data centers make profitability far worse for inference due to the massive amounts of capital necessary. Edit: There are an additional two points of leniency I forgot to mention. The electricity cost does not include cooling, as I am not using the PUE of data centers. I did not put training as an recurring OpEx cost for the AI labs. Additionally, just to hammer this point home, these costs are all assuming the inference provider is at a loss from 5 years, before paying a single interest payment. There exists no business that can do this. In fact what this shows is that no inference provider could ever charge at the optimal max usage and concurrency rate, so the price per hour of GPU is much *much* higher. You can simply search the prices yourselves. For people that are concerned with the 3 year amortization period of B200s. As another comment had posted this is typically 6 for normal GPUs. Even allowing for that does not tilt the argument in their favor. However, I do not agree that 6 years is reasonable for Blackwells, as AI labs tend to chase bigger models whenever compute is available. Not to mention, Vera Rubin racks are *not* interchangable and require purchasing of all new equipment and cooling the moment you try to install. Which means an inference provider has to either: 1. Sell the Blackwells to make space (there is no demand for these GPUs outside of AI) 2. Construct entirely new facilities to house them. If we amortize over 6 years, then now you have to assume that 3 years after Vera Rubins every single Blackwell GPU (including the hundreds of millions NVIDIA claims to have sold!) they are being fully utilized 24/7. Let's also remember that if NVIDIA *doesn't* sell AI chips, this industry is automatically gone. I cannot emphasize enough the extent I am deliberately picking points in their favor. Edit 2: If your qualms are with demand, read Ed's articles, the host of the podcasts this sub is centered around. That is beyond the scope of this post, and was written with that information already in mind. The only thing I can say is there are lots of other facts you likely have not seen if this is your stance. Some seem to think refuting a technicality over one point is able to overcome 16 other points of leniency. This is wishful thinking at best. You cannot cherry pick technalities to make the argument convenient. Either you leave them all off, or put them back on. If you feel the need to defend AI due to your own investment portfolio or some other psychological need, on this basis, you are free to do so, but I strongly encourage you to read some other very nice breakdowns by Ed.

On May 12, eBay's board told Ryan Cohen his bid was "neither credible nor attractive." And officially rejected the bid. On August 2, Cohen activated the convertible debt exchange. Yesterday, EBAY posted a blowout quarter. Every headline says the board's position is stronger than ever. None of that matters. # Because eBay is 105% institutionally owned. Meanwhile, the board is actively dropping their ownership. So why the fuck isn't anyone talking about what that means for an M&A? And why is everyone ignoring that the last thing Ryan Cohen said is this will be decided by the owners of the company? # The Number Everyone Is Ignoring [](https://x.com/GoatBeardzDD/article/2085430978697117814/media/2085405241206321152) https://preview.redd.it/1ytbcivmsshh1.png?width=1804&format=png&auto=webp&s=dbee1b825295b8d12560f28848c9a848b1fc3488 eBay institutional ownership summary — 105.69% institutional ownership, 444M shares outstanding, $52.158B total value of holdings # 105.69%. Institutions don't just own eBay. They own more shares than actually exist. 444 million shares outstanding, $52.158 billion in institutional holdings. The number exceeds 100% because shares get lent, borrowed, and double-counted through short positions and derivative overlaps. But the structural point is absolute: the entire float and then some is all institutional capital. In a typical public company with 30-40% institutional ownership, "going directly to shareholders" means a public campaign. Newspaper ads. TV interviews. Podcasts. A proxy fight where you spend months trying to convince millions of dispersed retail holders to override their board. That's the movie everyone is waiting for, for some fucking reason. It's NOT this movie. When Cohen told Barron's in June that he would take the bid directly to eBay's owners, every analyst interpreted this as a hostile public proxy fight. When he said on CNBC "we're coming for eBay one way or another," the coverage framed it as bluster. https://preview.redd.it/b8soiv5psshh1.png?width=1330&format=png&auto=webp&s=fa1bc84e0926a0e116817893e0361f011d4f65e2 [](https://x.com/GoatBeardzDD/article/2085430978697117814/media/2085406454861697024) But in a company that is 105% institutionally owned, "going directly to shareholders" is a phone call. It's a series of private meetings. It's a slide deck you present to consultants at those instutitions. It's wall-crossing conversations where you share the terms under NDA and gauge willingness to tender before the offer goes public. It's the same channel through which the convertible exchange was negotiated — "privately negotiated exchange agreements with certain institutional holders." # The Tender Math at 105% Under Delaware law, a tender offer doesn't need board approval. Cohen needs a majority of shares tendered to close. GameStop already owns 9.8% of eBay: 43.39 million shares, physically settled on July 17. https://preview.redd.it/tjw6din5tshh1.png?width=1694&format=png&auto=webp&s=72f5f74a2149e537c6d5d4a36231f750e074587b [](https://x.com/GoatBeardzDD/article/2085430978697117814/media/2085407113367449600) That means he needs roughly another 41% of total shares outstanding to reach majority. In a company where institutional ownership exceeds the total share count, the top 15 holders alone probably represent 45-50% of shares outstanding. The decision lives inside a concentrated pool of portfolio managers who already know the terms because the terms have been in the market since May 3. Cohen doesn't need to convince the long tail. He doesn't need a PR war. He doesn't need to run ads. He needs a room. # And the convertible exchange just told us he's already been in that room. The same class of institution that holds eBay - the 144A qualified institutional buyers, the large asset managers, the funds that make up that 105% - are the same counterparties who just voluntarily swapped guaranteed par-value GameStop debt for equity at $19. I laid out the full mechanics of that exchange in my previous post. The point here is different. The point is: the exchange wasn't just a balance sheet move. It was a signal. Those counterparties told you which side they're on. They traded a guaranteed return for equity upside in the acquirer. Now ask yourself: when Cohen picks up the phone and calls these same institutions about tendering their eBay shares, is that a cold call? # The Held Presentation On June 23, GameStop announced that Cohen was withdrawing his $35 billion performance award to focus entirely on the eBay acquisition. In the same press release, the company said it would release >"a detailed presentation of the strategic rationale and operational plan for the combined company" [](https://x.com/GoatBeardzDD/article/2085430978697117814/media/2085407889586315264) GameStop June 23 press release — "detailed presentation of the strategic rationale and operational plan for the combined company...this week" https://preview.redd.it/2d3bfi5tsshh1.png?width=1199&format=png&auto=webp&s=5bfe29ee77f333dd24694bd5090565be375733a6 Three days later, on June 26, the language softened. GameStop filed its fiscal year outlook and added one line: >"Additional materials regarding the proposed transaction are forthcoming." [](https://x.com/GoatBeardzDD/article/2085430978697117814/media/2085408453380485121) GameStop June 26 8-K "Additional materials regarding the proposed transaction are forthcoming" https://preview.redd.it/hnuc2tfusshh1.png?width=1886&format=png&auto=webp&s=e59aae2507589481ff715bd40b51dfae4df91626 That was over five weeks ago. The presentation has not been released. GameStop doesn't say "this week" and then sit on it for five weeks by accident. The presentation exists. The $500 million personal commitment structure has been worked out. The operational plan has been built. It's all ready. # My strong opinion: The presentation is the tender offer package. You don't release your pitch to eBay's shareholders as a press release and then re-file it as part of a Schedule TO. You hold it until you're ready to file. And you don't file until you've finished aligning the institutional base, which is what the convertible exchange just did. The sequence: 1. Align the institutional counterparties through the convertible exchange (August 2) 2. Let the initial selling pressure wash through 3. File the tender with the full package: presentation, financing, $500M commitment 4. The tender reprices the stock through the $29 level that the exchange just structurally cleared The materials have been ready since late June. The key question was when to deploy them. # The eBay Earnings Wrinkle eBay reported Q2 yesterday. Double beat. * $3.13 billion in revenue, up 15%. * EPS of $1.60 versus $1.51 consensus. * GMV of $22.4 billion, up 15%. * Focused category GMV up 26%. * Full-year guidance raised. https://preview.redd.it/pr1s5r2xsshh1.png?width=1290&format=png&auto=webp&s=ea61c01ebba328f687b8fa826e5bb43877f4c71e [](https://x.com/GoatBeardzDD/article/2085430978697117814/media/2085409174079291393) eBay Q2 2026 earnings release headline — revenue, EPS, GMV beats The board will use this. "We're executing. We're growing. We don't need GameStop." But now look at Q3 guidance. * 7-9% organic FX-neutral GMV growth. * Visible deceleration from Q2's 15%. * Depop closed at $200 million more than initially announced. * Near-term earnings pressure from integration costs. Here's what that means for the institutional holders staring at both positions. eBay is trading at \~$112. The bid is $125. The stock is at 90% of the offer price. Growth is decelerating. Depop weighs on near-term margins. The question for every portfolio manager holding eBay is simple: do you believe eBay sustains 15%, or is this the peak? If the growth is peaking, $125 is the exit. The board can point to a strong quarter all day. But the board doesn't own the company. The institutions who hold 105% of the shares outstanding do. And when you're a portfolio manager and the stock is trading at 90% of a $125 bid with decelerating growth, the math doesn't care about the board's press release. # The Structure of the Combined Company Cohen isn't building a bigger GameStop. He's building a holding company. This has been signaled from the beginning. The Teddy Holdings trademark portfolio. The withdrawal of the $35 billion performance award, not because it was excessive, but because the compensation structure of an operating company CEO doesn't belong at the holdco level. Cohen said he would run the combined company as CEO with no salary and no cash bonus. # My strong opinion: GameStop reorganizes into a holding company structure via a §251(g) short-form reorganization under Delaware law. GameStop and eBay become wholly-owned operating subsidiaries. Teddy sits at the top. # Here's how the capital stacks: TD Securities (up to $20B) * The anchor bank for the transaction. * This sits at the top of the capital structure. * Senior secured. First claim on cash flows. SWF Preferred/Structured Equity (\~$26B) * PE-equivalent. * Permanent duration. * Likely at the holdco level. * Senior to common but below debt. GameStop Operating Cash (\~$5B) * Reduced from \~$9.4B after spending \~$4.3B to accumulate the 9.8% eBay toehold. * The toehold removed 43.39M shares from the tender at \~$101 average cost - shares that would have cost $5.4B at the $125 offer price. * The toehold saved over $1B in deal cost while giving Cohen voting power and a blocking position. Cohen's GP Commit ($500M) * The founder's personal capital. Disclosed on All-In, confirmed in the Bloomberg interview July 16. * In PE terms, this is the general partner commit. * Less than 1% of total deal value. Enormous relative to his personal net worth. Converted Noteholders ($1.4B → Class A Common Stock) * Institutions who voluntarily gave up guaranteed par-value repayment for equity at \~$19. * After September 23, they are shareholders, not creditors. * If a §251(g) holdco reorganization follows, they carry through into the parent entity. * These become the institutional equity base of the combined company from day one. * Same class of capital that holds eBay. Same names being approached to tender. GMEWS Warrants ($32 Strike, October 30, 2026 Expiry) * The trailing capital call. * Exercise brings additional capital into GameStop's treasury at $32/share. # What the Combined Entity Looks Like Two operating subsidiaries under one holdco. eBay: the marketplace engine. * $22.4B quarterly GMV. * $3.1B quarterly revenue. * 28.5% non-GAAP operating margin. GameStop: the physical retail and collectibles platform. * Revenue up 14%. * Collectibles at 42% of sales. * Gross margins at 40.7%. Total: * Combined annual revenue: \~$16-17B. * Combined annual GMV: [$90B+](https://x.com/search?q=%2490B%2B&src=cashtag_click) . * Post-deal cash generation: [$2B+](https://x.com/search?q=%242B%2B&src=cashtag_click) annually from eBay alone. * Debt: $20B TD facility, serviced by combined cash flows. * Permanent capital: SWF equity + founder stake + converted institutional equity. That's a top-25 S&P 500 company with a permanent capital structure, two revenue engines, a founder-operator with the largest personal stake in the room, and an institutional shareholder base that was recruited before the tender was even filed. # A Note to Retail I know what some of you are thinking. You bought [GME](https://x.com/search?q=%24GME&src=cashtag_click) to fight institutions. And now I'm telling you the deal closes because institutions are aligned on both sides of the table. That the convertible exchange recruited the same qualified institutional buyers that the original movement was built to oppose. That the entire architecture depends on sovereign wealth funds and bank debt and private placements with names you'll never see. I get why that's hard to hear. But here's the thing. Cohen never told you he was building a meme stock. Go back and read everything he's ever said publicly. Not what the subreddits projected onto him. What he actually said. # He said he wanted to build a rival to Amazon. He said that in his original letter to the GameStop board in 2020. He said it when he took the chairman seat. He said it in his Barron's interview. He said it on Bloomberg. He said it on All-In. # It is the single most consistent statement he has made across six years of public commentary. Everything else has shifted: the product strategy, the cost structure, the capital allocation, the acquisition targets. # The Amazon framing has never moved. You rival Amazon with $90 billion in combined GMV, a permanent capital structure backed by sovereign wealth, a marketplace platform with 130+ million active buyers, a physical retail footprint, a collectibles vertical no one else can replicate, and a founder-operator who put $500 million of his own money on the table and took zero salary. That's what's being built. Retail saved GameStop from bankruptcy. Retail funded the ATM offerings that gave the company $9.4 billion in cash. That's real and it matters. We were the seed capital for everything that followed. But seed capital doesn't run the company at scale. Seed capital creates the conditions for what comes next. And what comes next is a holding company with two revenue engines, institutional backing, and the operational infrastructure to actually compete with the largest commerce platform on earth. If you're holding [GME](https://x.com/search?q=%24GME&src=cashtag_click) because you believed Cohen when he said he was building something that could rival Amazon, you're exactly where you're supposed to be. **Disclaimer:** I wrote this whole thing and used Claude Opus 4.6 to assist with a final editing pass and for title ideas. I also post more freeform and frequently on X under GoatBeardzDD.