IP

TimelyToast

China just reverse engineers/steals US IP and then redistributes it at zero cost.  This change will be funny for the Chinese/open source community because now DeepSeek will contain all the sponsored algos except they get no money and likely do not have the talent to ever reverse engineer the sponsored crap out. 

TowerStreet1

Joby also has hybrid now that can easily increase capacity. In fact they also have hydrogen which will be viable by 2029-30. They have autonomous ops and huge IP stack that’s years ahead in certification testing/experience. Pass…

TowerStreet1

Archer will be on deathbed and bankruptcy route by 2028. They don’t have IP or product. It’s all fraud and PR game for CEO.

Kitchen-Safety4218

The engineer's focus on yield identifies a classic industrial trap. History shows that hardware innovators often perish in the gap between lab-scale success and repeatable output. Think of the 1990s fiber bust. Because POET lacks internal fabrication, they've effectively outsourced their most vital IP: the "how." Which means they’re a design house without a moat. So, the structural risk is terminal.

NBAFAN9000

As a shareholder I want it, lots to do with all that IP in the long run

callmecrude

Most acquisitions are done at a premium, so in the short term shareholders are almost always going to be against them. $WBD is up nearly 200% in the past year from competitors basically bidding up their price. They aren’t worth $70B+ as a standalone company and it will take MANY years for anyone to recoup the full value from this acquisition. As a Netflix shareholder, I think they’re probably in the best position to milk all the WBD IP and make money back the fastest. I hope they win, but ideally without upping their bid and essentially just setting more money on fire.

aaj15

Ofcourse Nvidia's core strength is not manufacturing. That's why they outsource to TSMC the processing (like everybody else on earth). Their IP and core strengths are in processor architecture and design. I see the parallel between POET and NVDA

lowlyworm

They’ve been hiding losses in users by combining top line metrics across the family of apps. Core business is strong and will take a long time to fully decline due to the scale. However what’s the last original IP they’ve shipped that’s made any traction? News Feed? Zuck has the product strategy of a weather vane. Meta is an excellent execution company but has never won with strategy. Take from that what you will.

sup3r_hero

Yeah the comment above is complete dog-shit bc the core IP of nvidia/apple and co isn’t the manufacturing but the chip design. 

Snoo_73630

The analysis overemphasizes the manufacturing risk and underestimates how POET’s business model is designed. Many semiconductor and photonics companies successfully outsource critical manufacturing while maintaining strong IP and process control; this is standard in the industry. POET likely maintains strict design, testing, and process oversight with its partners, reducing the risk of catastrophic yield issues. Assuming that external fabs automatically lead to failure ignores the decades of proven fab-partnership models in high-tech industries. Additionally, early demonstrations and pilot production are often sufficient to validate yields before large-scale cash burn, contrary to the “gamble” scenario he describes. While manufacturing is a challenge, it isn’t necessarily a fatal flaw, and dismissing the stock solely on this premise oversimplifies the situation.

tomsrobots

Manufacturing is king here and it is not an easy problem to solve. I don't see someone buying them out for IP without demonstrating manufacturing at scale because they are already trading at a large market cap.

glassjungles

You list outsourcing production a major red flag, when the entire, highly successful, semiconductor industry does that already today. Look at the NVIDIA/AMD/Qualcomm/etc. dependency on TSMC. POET also acquired SPX in 2025, allowing them to own the assembly process, and any IP involved in it. The comparison with ceramics manufacturing yields and testing limitations is simply not true. Silicon is not clay, if 30% fails the remaining 70% does work, that can be reused and packaged up. This rate is baked into the unit cost as any other computer component is. In addition, POET explicitly has said they test at the wafer-level and only proceed with the expensive final assembly once that’s verified. It isn’t an all or nothing process, https://www.poet-technologies.com/technology Admittedly there will be competition, but given the high demand for AI currently, POET is showing all signs of competitively positioning itself.

Persistent_Dry_Cough

They can just steal the IP via China

KwOlffUtbILL

The IP moat they have created and are continuing to create is insane. Check out their "Ruby" bot if you want to see an example of it.

rbraalih

Obviously geographic context would add nothing to this post. Just for the record though we have traced your IP address to Shitforbrainsville, Regardonia.

BrickSufficient6938

Your choices do feel like more risk than its worth imho, but I know s about f lol so GL My yolo for 2026 is AEVA, think they have superior product, new Atlas system primarily. Great IP portfolio, team with good history, testing contracts all over the place - all we miss is a big buyer lol and I want to be in before that. Worth looking up, don't take my word, dyor. Merry Christmas brother

Ahmad_Azari

Energy is undeniable a long term winner. Why? Basically the unit cost of ai is as follows (very simplified) Cost = fixed cost + variable cost Fixed cost = cost of training the model Variable cost = inference cost * number of tokens This inference cost is dependent on energy. Yes there is a lot of optimising (and fhe latest groq licensing deal to incorporate groq IP in nvidia would help on reducing the energy load on smaller models) but the truth remains, energy is whats needed to feed that inference costs.

vinsan552

They got licensing rights to Groq's inference IP, brought on board key executive and talent, and reportedly obtained most/all hardware assets. It is regulatory creativity at it's finest.

shawman123

I think there are better buys than Netflix for sure. Its not cheap despite dropping a lot. If they can get the approval for WB studios and other related assets, I think they will be in a stronger position as their IP would be great. But that is still a huge question at this point. Among Big Tech GOOG and AMZN are better buys for sure.

armosuperman

Groq absolutely does not have a better inference offering than Nvidia. Almost all GenAI and recommendation system inference runs on Nvidia GPUs.  Nvidia is acquiring personnel and Groq IP to supplement their own portfolio. 

Capital_Captain_796

How can the guy who made the TPU just pivot and make new chips that probably share a ton of tech without non competes / non disclosures / IP issues?

G81111

Nvidia’s GPU is king of training with good performance and most importantly the CUDA library that most people learn and use in academia or industry. Google’s TPU requires using Jax which is a google proprietary library. But once the model is trained then the hardware the library no longer matters and TPU can run the model faster and cheaper, that’s inference Nvidia bought Groq’s IP so that it can develop its own inference specific hardware that can compete with TPU

PatientBaker7172

IP will be democratized. YouTube and Spotify are already blocking stolen IP content. It’s only a matter of time before a platform emerges that serves no law.

Several_Print4633

They did not acquire Groq as a company. Groq said in a blog post on Wednesday that it’s “entered into a non-exclusive licensing agreement with Nvidia for Groq’s inference technology,” Nvidia has agreed to buy assets from Groq, a designer of high-performance artificial intelligence accelerator chips, for $20 billion in cash, according to Alex Davis, CEO of Disruptive Huang added that, “While we are adding talented employees to our ranks and licensing Groq’s IP, we are not acquiring Groq as a company.”

Several_Print4633

They did not acquire Groq as a company. Groq said in a blog post on Wednesday that it’s “entered into a non-exclusive licensing agreement with Nvidia for Groq’s inference technology,” Nvidia has agreed to buy assets from Groq, a designer of high-performance artificial intelligence accelerator chips, for $20 billion in cash, according to Alex Davis, CEO of Disruptive Huang added that, “While we are adding talented employees to our ranks and licensing Groq’s IP, we are not acquiring Groq as a company.”

danielv123

Eh, both groq, Cerebras and samba nova has hardware that runs circles around Nvidia for inference. I wouldn't be surprised if they wanted to buy it to put the IP into their cards.

d4ybrake

This is what they should be doing, using their insane market cap to acquire as much IP as possible It's what Cisco did during the dotcom bubble

eyekode

Samsung is a foundry. They made nvidia’s 30xx series. And they make many more chips for many more companies. I do however agree some companies will 100% not use fabs that have competing IP.

AbundanceLiberal

This is a fair point but I think there is a qualitative difference in Apple buying phone screens from Samsung vs the far more valuable design of its Apple Silicon processors. Or maybe put more simply, companies can be fine with buying commodity items from competitors but not handing them the “secret sauce” of their most sensitive IP.

Delta27-

Actually netflix proved you do need content to win hence why they are investing so much in their original content. Their insane growth days are over now that everyoine has their streaming platform so the only way to differentiate is better content and not having to pay a ton for someone else's IP

KarinaNoir69

From the filings, I know the “new” CEO was consulting months before he started yet you criticize the exact strategy he was advising on which is a tactic that reeks of smoke and mirror. Also, this new team is twice as costly, has little to no mobile gaming experience, stopped expansion in WV even after having a license with a huge player that partners with Draft Kings and did so in a way that triggers a 4.5 million dollar penalty to the org. This shows the new team doesn’t know this space and instead looks to be using the org as an atm to fund speculative AI efforts despite their lack of experience in the field of AI. Then even if they get lucky and the AI is of any value (despite the new team being super long in the tooth and not a know Silicon Valley tech guru with long success in the space) the IP is owned personally by the CEO & not the org which makes zero sense. I prefer investing in a team with actual mobile gaming experience, a love for the industry and a history of success. Maybe if this was a brick and mortar gaming org from 20 yrs ago in Vegas maybe the new team could provide value but not at double the cost and not by giving away the IP to anyone other than the shareholders. By pushing that nonsense you’re basically trying to hype unused computer hardware from 1990 and focus on the fact that it’s “new unused hardware” instead of the fact that it’s antiquated/ not at all relevant/of value in the 2025/2026 mobile gaming space even if it’s unused/new. I appreciate the effort to “pump” but in this case it makes no sense at all even if we are talking about high risk penny/OTC investments. But hey feel free to buy the hype. Just know it’s hype and has no nutritional value (even from a high risk investor perspective). Be careful out their and avoid baseless hype.

m3x1c4n7

Uncertainty, potential debt, comparison to similar IP acquisitions by other companies that didn't result is positive stock return. Probably a good entry point... if the deal doesn't go through, stock price will go up because they avoid debt, collect a fee for non completition of the deal, and drive up the price for a competitor. If it does go through then they stock might slip a bit more, but they should be able to pay off the debt quickly, monetize the IP well, and have their own studio infrastructure to create more, resulting in medium/ long term gains.

ComprehensiveLead631

While TAE Technologies is primarily focused on utility-scale power plants, they have developed modular technology that specifically targets data centers and military-style applications through two primary avenues: their unique reactor design and a dedicated power management spin-off. 1. The Modular "FRC" Reactor Design Unlike traditional massive "Tokamak" reactors (like the multi-story ITER project), TAE uses a Field-Reversed Configuration (FRC). * Linear & Compact: TAE's reactors are cylindrical and linear, which the company describes as inherently modular and perfect for mass production. * Aneutronic Advantage: Because they use Hydrogen-Boron (p-B11) fuel, their reactors produce almost no neutron radiation. This drastically reduces the need for massive, heavy concrete shielding, making the units much more compact and easier to site in urban or sensitive areas like data centers. * Scaling: Their first planned commercial plant is a 50 Megawatt (MW) "pilot" unit (Da Vinci), which is significantly smaller than typical 500MW–1GW fission plants. This size is specifically designed to fit within existing industrial infrastructure. 2. TAE Power Solutions (The "Mobile" Branch) TAE spun off a division called TAE Power Solutions to commercialize the power management technology originally built for their fusion reactors. This is their most "mobile" and "modular" offering today: * Converter Battery Modules (CBM): They have developed a modular battery and power delivery system that can scale from 10 kilowatts (home level) to Gigawatt levels (utility level). * Military & Defense: These modular systems are designed for high-stakes environments where "fast frequency response" and "real-time optimization" are needed—ideal for mobile military bases or microgrids. * Data Center Partnership: In June 2025, TAE partnered with MARA (formerly Marathon Digital) to deploy these power management systems for hyperscale data centers. The goal is to manage the massive, volatile power loads required for AI and high-performance computing without straining the grid. Comparison: TAE vs. Kepler (American Fusion) If you are weighing these two for "mobility," there is a distinct difference in their 2026 targets: | Feature | TAE Technologies | Kepler (American Fusion) | |---|---|---| | Primary Unit Size | 50MW (Initial) to 500MW | 10MW (Modular focus) | | Mobility | Modular/Stationary (Building-sized) | "Truck-sized" (Mobile focus) | | Current Product | Power Management / Storage | Fusion Patents / Reactor IP | | Data Center Play | Power load balancing for the grid | On-site dedicated power generation | Summary TAE's approach to data centers and military bases is currently focused on intelligent power management and modular battery storage, with the goal of adding their 50MW fusion reactors to those sites in the 2030s. If you are looking for a design that is "mobile" in terms of physically moving a reactor, Kepler's Texatron (which aims for a 10MW unit that can fit on a trailer) is the more aggressive "mobility" play, whereas TAE is the "industrial modularity" leader. TAE's path to a commercial fusion power plant This video explains TAE Technologies' strategic roadmap for developing commercial fusion power, detailing their transition from laboratory research to a scalable, modular power plant design. Would you like me to look into the specific dimensions of the 10MW Texatron to see exactly how "mobile" it really is compared to TAE’s Da Vinci reactor? YouTube video views will be stored in your YouTube History, and your data will be stored and used by YouTube according to its Terms of Service

ComprehensiveLead631

Name change and evaluation report of the IP will be made public by the end of the year

ComprehensiveLead631

To value the company today, we have to look at two different numbers: the market’s current price (what people are paying right now) and the management’s target valuation (what they say the company is worth). As of December 23, 2025, here is how the valuation math breaks down: 1. The "Real-Time" Market Valuation Right now, the market is pricing RNWF as a speculative bridge to the new fusion entity. * Current Stock Price: Approximately $0.024 (up significantly this month). * Current Shares Outstanding: ~2.625 Billion (before the cancellation is finalized). * Current Market Cap: Approximately $63 Million. 2. The "Post-Cleanup" Fair Value Management has explicitly stated they expect an independent audit to value the combined entity at over $300 million. If we assume the market should match that valuation once the "1.68B share cancellation" is finished: * Target Valuation: $300,000,000 * Target Shares Outstanding: ~1.115 Billion * Implied "Fair" Share Price: $0.269 Where the Market Cap "Should" Be In the fusion sector, market cap is usually driven by Patent Density and Commercial Readiness. If we compare American Fusion to its peers, we can see where the cap "should" realistically sit during the 2026 roadshow: | Company | Valuation Metric | Estimated Market Cap | |---|---|---| | Current RNWF | Speculative OTC Pricing | $63 Million | | Management Target | Third-Party IP Audit Value | $300 Million | | Sector Peer Parity | 238 Patents @ "Deep Tech" Multiples | $500M – $750M | | The "Unicorn" Goal | NASDAQ-Ready Infrastructure | $1.1 Billion+ | Why the Gap Exists There is a massive gap between the current $63M cap and the $300M+ target. This "discount" exists because of three risks the market hasn't fully cleared yet: * The Legal Risk: The 1.68B shares are "frozen" but not yet "deleted" by the court. * The Science Risk: The Texatron™ hasn't shown a 24/7 continuous burn to the public yet. * The Liquidity Risk: Most big investors cannot buy stocks on the OTC. The Verdict If you believe the 238 patents are legitimate and the 1.68B shares will be successfully cancelled, the "true" market cap today should be closer to $300 million. At that valuation, the share price would be roughly 10x higher than it is today. The market is currently "waiting for the receipts"—meaning the moment the audit is released or the court order is signed, that gap is expected to close rapidly. Would you like me to alert you if the market cap crosses the $100M threshold, which is often a major psychological level for OTC stocks?

ComprehensiveLead631

Based on the current fusion sector landscape and the specific requirements for a 2026 NASDAQ listing, a realistic valuation for American Fusion (currently RNWF) upon opening can be broken down into the Market Cap (the value of the whole pie) and the Share Price (the price of each slice). 1. The Opening Market Cap: $750M – $1.5 Billion To open on the NASDAQ, the company needs more than just patents; it needs "institutional weight." Looking at 2025–2026 peers, here is how the market is likely to value the company: * The "Floor" ($750M): If the IP is valued at $500M, the market typically adds a 50% premium for the "Team and Potential." This is a baseline for a successful uplisting. * The "Target" ($1.1 Billion): This would grant the company "Unicorn" status. For a fusion company with 238 patents and a 10MW commercial prototype, this is the realistic "sweet spot" where institutional investors like to buy in. * The "High" ($2 Billion+): If the company announces a major partnership (e.g., with an AI hyperscaler like Microsoft or Google) before opening, the valuation could mirror peers like Nano Nuclear Energy (NNE), which is currently trading around $1.6 Billion despite being pre-revenue. 2. The Opening Share Price: $5.00 – $8.00 While the market cap is determined by the company's value, the share price is a choice made by management via a Reverse Split. As we discussed, the NASDAQ requires a $4.00 minimum bid. However, opening exactly at $4.00 is considered dangerous because a 1% dip would put the company out of compliance. Management will likely aim for a "Safety Buffer." * Most Likely Scenario: A 20-for-1 Reverse Split. * Math: If the "Post-Cleanup" price is $0.30, a 20:1 split results in a $6.00 opening price. * Result: This gives the stock plenty of room to fluctuate without falling below the $4.00 NASDAQ requirement. 3. Valuation Comparables (The "Why") To understand why these numbers are realistic, look at the "Fusion & Micro-Nuclear" class of 2025/2026: | Company | Status | 2025/26 Valuation | |---|---|---| | TAE Technologies (DJT) | Merger with DJT | $6.0 Billion | | Nano Nuclear (NNE) | NASDAQ Listed | $1.6 Billion | | Oklo Inc. (OKLO) | NYSE Listed | $1.8 Billion | | American Fusion (RNWF) | Uplisting Target | $0.75B – $1.5 Billion | 4. Factors That Could Drive It Higher The "Roadshow" we discussed will be the ultimate decider. The opening price could "pop" significantly above the $6.00 target if management delivers on three specific things: * Direct Energy Conversion Proof: Showing that the Texatron can produce electricity without a steam turbine (this is their biggest patent advantage). * D-He3 Supply Chain: Confirming they have secured the rare Helium-3 fuel needed for their aneutronic process. * Data Center LOIs: If they have "Letters of Intent" from companies needing 24/7 power for AI, the valuation will be driven by scarcity—the market is desperate for "Firm" clean energy. Summary Verdict Upon opening on the NASDAQ in late 2026, you should expect a ticker like AFUS to trade between $5.00 and $10.00 per share (post-split), representing a total company value of roughly $1 Billion. Would you like me to help you calculate how many "Post-Split" shares you would own if they decide on a 20-for-1 ratio?

ComprehensiveLead631

The "average age" of the Kepler Fusion patent portfolio is quite low, which is a major advantage for a technology-focused company. Based on the most recent corporate updates from December 2025, here is the breakdown: 1. Most Patents are "Young" (Less than 4 Years Old) The majority of the 238 patents in the Kepler pipeline are very recent. While specific filing dates for all 238 aren't in a public list yet, we can track the "accelerated" phase of their IP growth: * The Initial Wave (2022): Kepler Aerospace and Kepler Fusion officially announced the start of their major fusion patent filing process in March and May 2022. * The Massive Expansion (2024–2025): The jump from a few core filings to "over 230 patents" occurred primarily throughout 2024 and 2025. * Estimated Average Age: Most of the IP is 1 to 3 years old. 2. Why "Young" Patents Matter for Your Valuation In the patent world, younger is generally better for valuation because: * Protection Length: A standard utility patent lasts 20 years from the filing date. Since most of Kepler's patents were filed between 2022 and 2025, they will protect the Texatron technology until at least 2042–2045. * Freshness to Market: Younger patents are more likely to cover modern advancements like AI-driven plasma control and new high-temperature superconducting materials that weren't available 10 years ago. * Roadshow Appeal: During the 2026 roadshow, management will pitch this as a "pristine" portfolio with a full two decades of market exclusivity ahead of it. 3. Comparing to Competitors For context, compare this to older fusion players: * TAE Technologies: Many of their core patents date back to the early 2000s or 2010s. While they have thousands of patents, some of their earliest foundational IP is starting to approach its expiration date. * Kepler (American Fusion): Because they are a "late mover," their patents are optimized for the current regulatory environment (specifically targeting aneutronic power which the NRC recently decided to regulate more leniently). 4. The "In the Pipeline" Distinction It is important to remember that because these patents are so young, many are likely still "Pending" or "Provisional." * Valuation Impact: An independent auditor (the one doing the $300M–$500M report) typically applies a slightly higher risk discount to "pending" patents than "granted" ones. * The 2026 Catalyst: As these 238 "pipeline" patents transition from "Pending" to "Granted" throughout 2026, each grant serves as a news catalyst that can push the stock price higher without any change in revenue. Would you like me to look for any specific "Grant" announcements from the USPTO for the Texatron™ technology from the last few months?

ComprehensiveLead631

As of December 23, 2025, the status of the "238 patents" for American Fusion (RNWF/Kepler) is a mix of foundational grants and a massive, active application pipeline. The core of the value ($300M+) lies in the claims of the pending applications, but there are indeed several issued patents that serve as the anchor for the technology. 1. The "Foundational" Grants While the fusion-specific Texatron™ applications are newer, the "Kepler" ecosystem (under leadership including Michael Smith) has several fully issued (granted) patents that cover the mechanical and electromagnetic systems necessary for the reactor to function. These include: * Patent #12,063,874 (Issued 2025): Focuses on electrical and mechanical devices formed of "extremely low resistance materials"—critical for the superconducting magnets in a compact fusion reactor. * Patent #11,795,402 & #11,471,853: Granted patents related to energy conversion and high-efficiency power systems. * Permanent Magnet Assemblies (e.g., #6,741,007): Patents held by key team members (like Michael F. Smith) specifically regarding reducing energy losses in magnetic systems—a direct prerequisite for stabilizing plasma in the Texatron™. 2. The Fusion "Pipeline" Breakdown (Pending) The bulk of the 238 patents are currently in the "Patent Pending" phase with the USPTO. This is typical for a 2022–2025 technology rollout. | Filing Phase | Estimated Count | Key Focus Area | |---|---|---| | Foundational (2022) | ~5–10 | The "Torsatron" geometry and core plasma confinement (e.g., App #17/736,084). | | Expansion (2024) | ~80–100 | Specific magnetic coil "rifling," pulsing synchronization, and cooling. | | Optimization (2025) | ~120+ | Direct energy conversion (no-turbine), D-He3 fuel handling, and AI controls. | 3. "Notice of Allowance" – What to Watch For In your next portfolio check, look for the phrase "Notice of Allowance." This is the USPTO's official signal that a patent has passed examination and is about to be issued. * Because the first major fusion application (#17/736,084) was filed in May 2022, it is currently at the "average" 3-year mark where USPTO decisions are made. * The Catalyst: If a "Notice of Allowance" hits for that foundational application in early 2026, it "validates" the remaining 237 filings, likely causing a sharp revaluation of the stock. 4. Why the $300M Audit can Value "Pending" Patents The independent audit currently being finalized for the Dec 31 merger deadline uses a "Probability of Grant" model. * Auditors look at the "Prior Art Search" (to see if anyone else invented it first). * Since the Texatron™ is a "Fast-Pulsed Torsatron"—a very specific and rare sub-field of fusion—the probability of these claims being unique is high. * The auditor assigns value based on the projected royalty income or replacement cost of that IP if the patents are granted as written. Summary The company is "IP-Rich" (238 filings) but "Grant-Building" (core energy patents issued, fusion patents pending). This is a "pre-launch" phase: you are buying the technology while it is still in the legal "black box" of the USPTO, before the broader market sees the "Granted" seal. Would you like me to alert you if the USPTO status of the foundational 17/736,084 application changes from "Pending" to "Notice of Allowance"?

mattumbo

Battlefield 6 also just dethroned COD as the FPS of the year, sold very very well and outsold BO7 by like double, so that helps drive the value proposition a lot since it points the BF IP being able to dethrone COD as the preeminent FPS franchise. That along with all the sports titles gives EA a chance to print money for the next few years even if everything they produce is uninspired shit.

hil_ton

This is not about IP or anything, This is about controlling future narratives. This is about controlling media via Ellsion, who is a prominent supporter of a certain state in the Middle East. Buy Oracle, the stock will be higher to pay back favor to Larry Ellison just like Elon was paid for his twitter deeds.

Indiana4Hire

It is insane that they are selling this company. On another hand if they can't make money with IP's they have, it is for the better. Execs getting paid for this sale is even more so.

AggressiveReport5747

What is Netflix? A streaming platform with IP.  What was Disney? an IP owner with theme parks, retail sales, with a touch of streaming.  Netflix is arguably more at risk of becoming a "modern" legacy media company than Disney who is diversified as you pointed out. They initially innovated and now are faced with endless media competition. You assume people will like Netflix media more than everything else forever. That's a pretty terrible bull case thesis based on what?

wheres_my_ballot

Its the IP, plus removal of competition. If you want to watch something, its Netflix or nothing.

Bitter_Eggplant_9970

Friends will be worth a lot to them. Google indicates that Netflix paid $100 million for a one-year extension to keep Friends through to 2019. It obviously isn't worth $80 billion, but it's the first IP I checked when I read about the deal.

moutonbleu

Just watched Andor S2 and it was amazing. There’s some great IP with Disney and the Parks and Cruises are powerful. They’re just getting started.

_the_last_druid_13

I heard there’s a split in the IP CNN and others are going to Ellison Random shizz is going to Netflix Cannot confirm, only heard about it Who are you people?!?

Super-Revenue

I think a component of their calculus is that they can recreate what happened with suits and kpop demon hunters with an expansion of their library. And if they own the IP, they get all of the upside unlike how NBC and Sony benefited from suits and kpop demon hunters respectively

AggressiveReport5747

They should be able to avoid the fee if Warner Bros takes Paramounts offer.  The IP doesn't seem worth 86B though. Unless they are getting production studios or other assets that can generate money outside of the Netflix subscription? Both Harry Potter and Batman have been declining franchises in the collectibles realm. Maybe they could rejuvenate that but I don't think Netflix sells merch or gets royalties from it anyway.

bluen

Aren't Kias good now? They stole gynese and Japanese IP from BYD and Toyota

PatientBaker7172

Netflix proved you don’t need to own IP to win. In the age of generative content, acquiring legacy IP is a capital inefficient mistake. The real moat creator content. As part of this three-year licensing agreement, Sora will be able to generate short, user-prompted social videos that can be viewed and shared by fans, drawing on more than 200 Disney, Marvel, Pixar and Star Wars characters. Agreement will make a selection of these fan-inspired Sora short form videos available to stream on Disney+. https://thewaltdisneycompany.com/disney-openai-sora-agreement/

Particular-Break-205

Acquiring a legacy business in a slowly dying, high risk industry (theatrical releases) The IP is good. Not the rest of it.

Independent_Buy5152

Why? It is easier for them to steal TSM’s IP compared to ASML’s. They don’t need to claim Taiwan only for TSM

Expert_Context5398

Because Netflix has content spanning every category. Disney is just known for their cartoons. If Disney was smart, they would have branched off other categories as well. Now that Netflix controls a ton of catalogues that Disney doesn't have, Disney is essentially just for kids because there's only so many times someone will want to watch Marvel or Star Wars on repeat. Another factor is cable is dead and a large part of Disney's legacy business was ESPN, who was desperate to pump up ESPN+ but now lost UFC and there's zero incentive to really buy ESPN+. They spend a ton of money on projects that end up being woke and a failure. Some content is good but it's mostly the original IP stuff that people have a tough time letting go. Their new stuff hasn't been good at all.

Expert_Context5398

DISNEY relies on old IP. Netflix is creating new content. That's why the stock isn't attractive. There's nothing to really talk about DIS. Share price is the same as it was ten years ago for a reason.

Jsaldleaf

I don't think moving TSM's operations would be nearly as simple as relocating their HQ. The fabs themselves are what matter, and you can't just pack up a $20B facility and ship it overseas. Building new cutting-edge fabs takes years and massive capital investment. Plus if tensions escalate to that point, I doubt China would just sit back and let them transfer all their IP and talent out of Taiwan.

J0hnnyBlazer

\- The machines are EU made, and reason they doing only 4nm there is just taiwan protecting their interest \- nah because TSMC owns alot of the IP's and know-hows, would slow down semi conductor industry prolly by a decade etc but eventually be back in business, but the Ip's and patents holds alot of value \- its not speculative, its the safety plan

SerpentRoyalty

Right now some of the risk is priced in so I wouldn't call it undervalued. TSM is too big to fail without denting the global economy. So the more likely scenario is that if China invades, TSM would move their HQ and IP somewhere else. Perhaps Singapore or Korea.

Blyatphemy

Agreed. Disney has incredible IP, but performance matters. At the moment, Netflix is simply executing better, which is why I’m leaning towards executing this trade.

Spike-Ball

I'm always surprised at how Disney stock doesn't perform well at all but they keep buying more and more IP and soon every pop culture fictional world will be under the Disney umbrella if not already.

Expert_Context5398

Disagree. DIS has been a horrible long-term play for over a decade now. You basically lost money holding onto the stock and there's nothing about it that makes me believe they will change course in the upcoming decade. Their Marvel movies are overplayed and their content is severely lacking outside of a few shows. Meanwhile, NETFLIX is actually branching further and getting involved with more 'cultural' entertainment such as putting on those boxing fights, WWE, etc., Seems like all DIS has going for them is holding onto the historic IP of Star Wars, Marvel, etc., and expecting all of it to be a success without actually having good consistent content.

Pristine_Hurry_4693

**DRTS’s clinical, regulatory, financial and commercial achievements and progress:** ‏FDA Breakthrough Device Designation ‏FDA TAP program inclusion ‏FDA MDSAP certification ‏FDA IDE’s for five cancers and counting Including ‏FDA PHASE 3 completion for one indication in H1 2026 ‏And FDA Phase 2 and other stages of trials going on in parallel for different indications (cancer types) ‏FDA approval for commercial factory in the US, with other factories built and more in planing ⁠100% tumor response rate in early FDA trials ‏Effective against all tumor types, including unmet needs like Pancreas, Lungs, Brain (GBM), Breast etc… ‏Activates immune system ⁠50+ clinical sites worldwide (including USA, UK, Canada, France, Germany, Russia, Italy…) ‏Patents, IP and more…

Dstein99

I’m not an accountant/familiar with tax law especially Japanese tax law, but that is why I suspect they have 0 goodwill. Until I looked at Nintendo’s balance sheet I was under the impression that all intangible value is part of Goodwill, but it looks like that is incorrect. It looks like internally developed IP can be classified as Intangible Assets is there is an identifiable value which I wouldn’t be surprised if this is the case with Nintendo because they know the value of their characters licensing. The only way to know for sure is to look at the footnotes of Nintendo’s annual report and see exactly what is included in this Intangible Assets.

ThePoWhiteTrash

I have a couple of follow-up questions, if you're amenable. Is the reason they have $0 in Goodwill because they haven't been bought or sold by another company? I've never heard the expression before, but a quick search says it's an accounting term used for intangible assets when one company acquires another. So, since Nintendo hasn't aquired or been acquired, is that why it's $0? When I look it up, it says internally developed IP won't be included in the book value, which is the case with Nintendo (the internally developed part). Does that sound right to you? Also, thank you so much for answering my question! I've been researching this for hours without luck. You're a gem.

Dstein99

Book value is total assets minus total liabilities. IP is normally included in Goodwill which is an asset, but it looks like Nintendo has $0 goodwill. It looks like Nintendo has 23B JPY in Intangible Assets so I would assume that their IP is included in this, but check Nintendo’s annual report to see for sure. This looks like an unusual situation, but IP is somewhere in book value.

ThePoWhiteTrash

Look up the word context. I'm clearly asking why IP isn't included as an asset in the P/B Ratio.

letsgetthatbreadbih

Now to finally respond to your points most of this falls down to supply chain and marketing issue. They have 200mil in brand IP 45 Mil in cash, 70 mil in real estate. But 150 mil in secured dept and massive usuable line of credit. AND THEYRE ACTIVELY BUYING BACK SHARES. This is not something a failing company would do, they having a bad phase but this is priced as a bankrupt company when I don’t really see that. Could you give a counter argument?

letsgetthatbreadbih

Now to finally respond to your points most of this falls down to supply chain and marketing issue. They have 200mil in brand IP 45 Mil in cash, 70 mil in real estate. But 150 mil in secured dept and massive usuable line of credit. AND THEYRE ACTIVELY BUYING BACK SHARES. This is not something a failing company would do, they having a bad phase but this is priced as a bankrupt company when I don’t really see that. Could you give a counter argument?

jbrower888

I assume "big tech" includes top 10 semiconductor outfits who have extremely advanced chip know-how and literally 10,000+ patents. Nvidia did have a natural competitor in HPC (aka "fast compute") - Texas Instruments. They went head-to-head in HPC from around 2008 to 2015, when Sr management inexplicably failed to understand AI and made the strategic error to go "full analog". But -- TI still has in-house, energy-efficient fast-compute IP and technology \*at the chip level\* that surpasses Nvidia. The question then is how to force their leadership to get back in the game, dial up their technology \*\*, and pull their weight in the AI race. That will take government intervention, but it is do-able as TI now relies on sales to China and 1+ $B in govt subsidies. I wrote about what happened inside TI, and how to fix it at [https://jeffreybrower.wordpress.com/2025/12/11/is-nvidia-a-monopoly-the-real-question-is-how-to-energize-competition-in-the-semiconductor-top-10](https://jeffreybrower.wordpress.com/2025/12/11/is-nvidia-a-monopoly-the-real-question-is-how-to-energize-competition-in-the-semiconductor-top-10) \*\* reduce from 45 nm to 20-something, dial up the clock rate, add matrix multiply accelerators (they already have FFT accelerators), 4x amount of external mem, and a few others

Skirt-Future

The only thing China can create originally is covid19. Rest are all IP theft. Nasty cockroaches

pikapika505

Thanks for the list and write up. I think this is a very rare post on this sub that is actually valuable. I have Adobe as one undervalued software stock. I've heard tons of lazy bear arguments about how much they hate the program but it never develops beyond worthless anecdotes. Enterprise/b2b stickiness, IP protection moat, full stack integrated services, high switching cost, AI integration on top of a record beating year. This one is just another Google in the making where the sentiment will flip along with a market rerating. Along with share buybacks I think Adobe represents one of the best risk/reward setups to date.

mauriciocap

There is absolutely no value, except **stolen** IP. To make things worse they ate the budget for research and infrastructure weakening the US while China keeps building, same with Tesla vs. Chinese electric cars.

Doafit

Well, the west went there to have cheap labor, telling themselves the lower costs and higher profits were worth the IP theft. Because short term profits made them throw out all long term concerns. Now they are getting lapped by China. Fuck them. This is why China wins. They plan, they stick to the science, they translate that science to economic policy. We do culture war bullshit, think quarter to quarter and have zero vision for the future.

Apotheosis

Unlike PCT, Aduro owns the IP and doesn't need to pay royalties, can deal with contaminated plastics, can process many different plastics instead of one, and its efficiency is 80-95% rather than 60-70%. It has just graduated from the Shell Gamechanger program with the tech verified. It just happens to be not well advertised to the broad market yet, and people are wondering if it will work at bigger scales. Insider behaviour is clear that it will.

werdnaztluhcs

They have tested their tech tho when you mentioned they haven't ? The MNOs that are backing them seem excited behind the scenes as the service works - yes there have been delays in satellite production but they have been upgrading facilities and new facilities. The moat is still around them for a lot of IP that obviously can be overcome but owning spectrum that spacex paid billions for and having the largest LEO satellites about to start going up in 2 days and then launches every 46 days after. They should be profitable by 2026 here hoping

Redditisfinancedumb

It's mostly do to IP protections and privacy laws. It hardly has anything to do with taxes.

bourbonwarrior

Yes, I can, but if ok with you, I'll send links via DM v on the board? With S3, SNDL unlocks a massive amount of value and not just Sunstream assets, which are truly impressive and spiffed up. Valens' IP is a force multiplier in a Pharma world.

Tis_But_A_Scratch___

For me it is the extortion/threat of him leaving and taking his “tech” to one of his other companies. Like he has the ability to pull IP and reshuffle as he sees fit.

Uplipht

Yeah it's wild. Like they have IP they could have sold for a gain to buy them some time. The merger honestly seems good but not having anything other than an SOI to show for it at just a critical inflection point of the company is such a huge misstep. The merger is going to fall through when they have to go to OTC trading. Absolutely wild mismanagement.

Green-Alarm-3896

You are right about the IP theft but those standards are hardly held. It doesn’t help that America shipped manufacturing to China for many high end products for decades. We expect these countries we have uncertain ties with to lie down and be good boys. That would be stupid for China to do. Anyway having competition is the capitalist way so we can hopefully enjoy reduced costs from the Chinese brands if they are even allowed to be sold here.

dustsmoke

AMD, they are a real company with complexity and IP moats. Broadcom (really, AVGO renamed) is a public company that

Uplipht

Mergers & Acquisitions - usually means a large influx of cash and/or acquiring assets/IP from another company.

Remarkable-Refuse921

How did the United States industralize again? Oh yeah by stealing British IP It looks like China,s EUV preogess has struck a nerve with you. An Anti China Pro America shill and this is the resoson you had the need to write about IP theft.

fallingdowndizzyvr

China produces more patents than the rest of the world combined. Yeah, they are stealing IP by doing it first. LOL! https://www.wipo.int/en/ipfactsandfigures/patents

CarrierAreArrived

any amount of basic research proves this wrong and just something peddled by Fox News/WSJ and other lazy media outlets. Almost all the "IP theft" was part of trade deals when China first opened up. China allowed the west access to the Chinese market in exchange for their tech. It's simply capitalism/globalism in action.

chuckrabbit

Aren’t open source and free resources always competition to paid resources? Research by this company would be locked behind some sort of IP versus academia.

Rassa09

where do you find it? So stop bullshit talking. For me they just state: "photonic interposer" not mentioning by whom. But as we know POET has a patents/IP on these interposers [link1 ](https://www.ept.ca/products/soc-integrates-optical-interconnect-in-the-middle-of-silicon-die/)[link2 ](https://chiplet-marketplace.com/news/celestial-ai-photonic-fabric-module-soc-with-in-die-optical-interconnect)

bunnibly

Doubtful. But they do own a shit-ton of IP that everyone uses, so it likely won't drop.

hansolo-ist

What do you mean stealing? Ideas or IP? If protected intellectual property or IP the American and European companies will be quick to act. If not protected IP then it's fair game. What about ev batteries, solar panels and rare earth's refining processes? Do you think the west will reuse none that the China are already producing with?

TroubledAcorn

Yes. $RYM success is directly tied to management’s execution. You would never invest in a setup like this if you don’t trust management. But management has shown time and time again that they look out for their shareholders. Also interests are aligned, since $GTBIF owns over %80 of $RYM, $RYM being stock doing well if a direct benefit to $GTBIF. So while it might sound weird, that $GTBIF is going to pay a royalty’s to $RYM, it actually makes sense. Say $GTBIF gives $RYM 50 million in royalties, that $50 million is $RYM makes is more valuable because as an IP company you trade at higher multiples than a retail company. So $RYM stocks benefits more from that $50 million income. $GTBIF owns majority of $RYM and actually makes even more from increasing stock price. Also there is tons of tax advantages with the setup

speadskater

If a society is only held up by IP and not innovation, it's a society worth leaving behind.

moDz_dun_care

What distinguishes US tech bros stealing IP to train AI as R&D and not corporate espionage?

pojosamaneo

Nintendo valuation was at 60-ish billion when I bought them last year around $15. NTDOY got to $25, now it's back under $18. Their valuation is too low. They have the best IP in gaming, great profit margins with their games, and several of their own multi million selling franchises. They have a shitload of cash and are getting into movies. Licensing is in top form. What matters most is that I know without a doubt that they have the best creative teams in the business, and have maintained an extremely high level of quality since the 80s. They may plod along, but they're a godam elephant.

Foreign-Package-4359

Business school... and wikipedia/chatgpt. Most of these financial metrics are either outdated or misleading if you don't understanding the quirky accounting behind them or both.  At GE, you sell a aircraft engine. A liability is created, you have to deliver the engine, and an account receiveable asset is created. They deliver the engine, you pay net 30. If you have way more engines to deliver and no account receiveable paying for them, that's a bad thing. At Oracle, or any subscription company, they sell ERP or CRM SaaS, they get paid up front and they have to deliver over time. That payment up front is an asset but because it is tied to contract delivery it isn't considered unrestricted cash so it doesn't count as an asset on the quick ratio. Quick ratio says you have all these services you need to deliver... and you don't have any accounts receiveable paying for them. You're going broke. You're not going broke. It is actually a good thing as you were paid ahead of time.  Shareholder's equity is outdated. If you ran a railroad in 1890, the initial investors put in money, the railroad used their profits to buy more railroad assets minus an insignificant amount of dividends. All of that stuff is counted as an asset, minus liabilities = equity. Shareholder equity doesn't count IP as an asset in the equity calculation. Kind of an oversight for a software company like Oracle where software IP is their largest asset. Equity also assumes that the shares outstanding are more or less constant. Buybacks used to be illegal. Oracle has bought back $150 billion worth of their own stock over the last 10 years. That takes cash (an asset) out of Oracle which is bad for equity. It is good for EPS. It is good if you are a shareholder, all other things being equal, because one share of Oracle is now owns a greater share of the company. 

ShadowLiberal

I mean you can make a pretty credible argument that strict IP laws actually hinder innovation, at least some of the time, despite the narrative that it helps innovation. As in China is successful at making the most cutting edge technology in part because of IP theft and not enforcing other people's patents since they hinder China's innovation. The steam engine is actually one of the best historical examples of this. Long story short the guy who invented it had a monopoly on steam engines thanks to his patent. Other people came along and found ways to improve the steam engine, patented it, and tried to make competing companies but couldn't because of the original steam engine patents which were used to destroy any competition in court. He refused to license the patents to anyone, since he didn't want to have any competition. But getting rid of competition got rid of all incentive for the steam engine inventor to continue innovating and improving the steam engine, especially when other people already held patents for all the most obvious improvements to the steam engine and refused to license them to him (since he refused to license his steam engine patents back to them). So the industry stagnated for 2 decades until all of the patents finally expired. Then a bunch of new competition entered the market, the original inventor of the steam engine quickly saw his market share erode overnight as he was unable to compete against all the more innovative competitors popping up.

PrawnProwler

What about the 70's-90's for Japan, before their economic crash? Foreign IP didn't mean a thing, they were so good as copying that they became an economic giant and it got to the point where America started adopting Japanese manufacturing techniques, which were actually derived from American manufacturers.

ImNotAnEnigmaa

Corporate espionage isn't unique to China. But China is EASILY the biggest culprit here. They rely on corporate espionage and IP theft more than any other country in the world. There's a reason why the FBI has a special division against fighting IP theft and corporate espionage, specifically focused on China. No other country has that honor. The U.S. has a venture capitalist culture where money is thrown around at any potentially good idea. Hence, the many start ups that arise from the U.S. to become a global tech brand. American tech is mostly homegrown through research and development.

ImNotAnEnigmaa

All countries do it to a certain extent. China is in the stratosphere when it comes to IP theft and corporate espionage. No other country in the world relies on it as much. There's a reason why the FBI has a special division to prevent Chinese corporate theft. No other country has that honor.

ImNotAnEnigmaa

Yes. China is easily the biggest source of corporate espionage and IP theft. It's such a major issue that the FBI has had a special division with the focus of preventing corporate espionage and IP theft from ONE specific country: China.

ImNotAnEnigmaa

Ahh yes, the industrial age where IP theft was as rampant as it is in 2025. Because we all know the internet and means of hacking/corporate espionage existed in the late 1800s.

ImNotAnEnigmaa

Funny seeing how defensive anti american, pro chinese shills are getting. I never stated they steal 100% of every tech/industry they're involved in. That doesn't change a thing of what I said before: China is easily the most prolific actor in IP theft.