IP

ML7777777

Bot? Nice deflection. Too bad its documented in court records and articles that China could not provide ample proof that they developed OLED and Folding Screen technology at all. At best they showed basic research into fundamentals but nothing that matches the advanced IP required to produce the products. And that's why the U.S. granted the most strict restrictions against China. You can also look up the court cases for the two Japanese companies who filed a lawsuit and ultimately just asked for cross licensing. It came after Korea started out producing Japan in advanced DRAM. You can look up when that happened, too. You can either retort with proper rebuttal or just throw out accusations as if that does anything other than point out your inability to counter because you have no counter. Maybe you can steal a counter argument?

ML7777777

Sorry for your non-argument. China needs to stop stealing IP. At least they can buy other countries IP which is fine. Maybe do that instead of stealing.

ML7777777

>Samsung simply stole DRAM and LCD secrets and IPs from Japan 20 More lies to deflect the shame from Chinese IP theft that is blatant and numerous. There are only two cases where Japanese accused Samsung of DRAM theft but their details of what they stole was so vague, that it never reached a verdict in court and one didn't even get a formal trial. It got settled via a CROSS LICENSING between the two countries. This was seen as an attempt to get access to IP Japan needed from Korea because the Japanese were falling behind the Koreans in DRAM exports. Even the press were dubious of their claims. Example: >Hitachi provided only sketchy details. A spokesman said the technology in question was a Hitachi process to make two sizes of dynamic random access memory chips. You can make your claims but not everyone is unaware of how things actually work. Korea has a documented pipeline of R&D and investments into core technologies. China simply doesn't and when China lost its OLED and Folding Screen lawsuit, the reason why the US was willing to impose a 15 year ban on all Chinese products using the stolen tech was that China had ZERO documented research into the technologies that they could demonstrate in court. This proved they didn't develop their own versions, they literally used the tech they obtained illegally from Samsung.

ML7777777

Licensing tech is common and used to avoid lawsuits. This is normal for every tech company. The difference that you ignore is China doesn't play by international rules and will steal first and then come to the bargaining table once caught and forced too. And your projection about using bots. Lol, we know which country floods social media with bots. Beyond that stupid strawman, the legal process and courts don't take input from bot. Grow up. Lastly, YMTC has a "hybrid bonding" patent Samsung used. One specific patent for one aspect of NAND. The fact that you try to word is such that YMTC has many contributions to NAND is typical propaganda you guys do. In case you don't know, more like won't admit, Samsung holds the core IP for 3D NAND which they pioneered. 3D NAND is what every NAND vendor produces today.

fallingdowndizzyvr

> In other word, China's practice of restricting market access or subsidies conditioned on forced tech transfer, as China has forced upon all foreign since 2011, or domestic production requirement since 2015 is illegal Again, the US does all those things. > How do we know this? Because the WTO has ruled against the US for doing illegal things. > And, yes, every developed country, from the EU, to the US, to Japan/Korea, etc, is now employing the same anti-market strategy to counter China's abuses past 25+ years since its accession to the WTO in 2001. LOL!!!!! The US has been all those things since way before China joined the WTO. The US has been doing those things since there has been a US. Since day one. For a long time, the US was synonymous with IP theft. https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1npzzt That hasn't stopped. Industrial Espionage is still part of US foreign policy.

fallingdowndizzyvr

> Sure, China dominates in solar and EV because they were able to hijack the supply-chain early on by employing anti-market/mercantile practices such as IP theft/forced tech transfer, illegal subsidies, banning foreign suppliers/LCR (local content requirement), dumping, etc. The the US playbook then. They just did it better.

SoCallMeDeaconBlues1

What's funny about that license (which only extends specifically to hybrid bonding) is the tech is something Samsung could've easily gotten elsewhere. This is the part of the process where the NAND die is bonded to the logic die; Kioxia is already doing it, SK isn't far behind, neither is Micron. Samsung licensed the YMTC hybrid bonding process because it was probably cheaper and quicker for them to do that then it would've been to develop it in house using the other licensable processes; it was an easy way to just pick up the ball and run. What's also interesting is there are soooo many other areas of making 3D NAND that YMTC was simply dead last to the table with. But unless you filed in China, owning IP on any of it does you no good- and even if you did, the Chinese courts are VERY forgiving to the Chinese companies, to the point that it's not even worth thinking about trying to sue in China. This is why YMTC NAND hasn't shown up in the US yet. Apple actually tried to a couple years ago but gave up on it. The original patents on that hybrid bonding technology were filed by Ziptronix, and Tessera eventually bought that portfolio. First in the wild was Sony (used it for image sensors) but their license came from Ziptronix directly. Tessera eventually became Xperi, which then eventually split into 2 publicly traded entities, Xperi and Adeia; Xperi is the device side, Adeia is the IP licensing side. Both Kioxia and Micron licensed the Ziptronix patents from Adeia. I'm not saying anything that you can't just google for yourself. All these kids in here talking about this and that because they probably built their gaming rigs with sticks containing DRAM from CXMT and think they know everything about it cracks me up. The ad hominem attacks are the icing on the cake. I know it comes across arrogant but they really have no idea what they're talking about, from an IP standpoint or a device construction standpoint.

NappyDougOut

I didn't say I was against the premise of the OG post, but in tech investing, a big component of wise investing is breaking down how the tech works, risks to operations, and sustainability... I'm a developer by nature, so in evaluating how this iteration of Ai & training resources works, I have veey little faith in it's long-term sustainability... Major cracks are already beginning to surface. It also relies heavily on humans continuing to post accurate new info, their opinions, & IP on reddit unpaid, when it's becoming more hostile towards human users each day, which makes it all a rather nonsensical & hughly risky gamble.

ExpressionAlarming

What is the obvious IP theft? I see an obvious bot here who keeps telling old fashioned lies. Maybe you should instead tell the truth about how Japanese companies are actually stealing commercial secrets from Taiwan and Samsung

NappyDougOut

Twitter was the #1 tool for real time data... Now it's charging unpaid people to share their knowledge, ideas, & IP to have it "seen" by others or accounts get ratioed, no matter how valuable the posts they make are... It's bewildering how tech has come to that twisted reality. But it also explains why the platform is now a wasteland of dull bot posts now. 😞🍌

ML7777777

Its not to sue them to stop in China, they can't. Its to leverage IP laws to keep those Chinese products out of western markets.

ML7777777

That's for older DDR4 and DDR3 which they have licenses for. DDR5 was stolen from Samsung and once that hits global markets I'd expect lawsuits just like Samsung eventually won their lawsuit against BoE for using Samsung IP for folding screens and OLED screens.

ML7777777

China can't do a better job at all, even though they are using stolen Samsung IP, poached Samsung engineers for over a decade and work with both SK Hynix and Samsung in their Chinese DRAM fabs, they still couldn't get DDR5 right. They even had to bring in a different Korean company (Haesung DS) to help get DDR5 yields up and to get them to help map a path to DDR6.

tooltalk01

>Look at solar and EVs.  Sure, China dominates in solar and EV because they were able to hijack the supply-chain early on using mercantil practices such as IP theft/forced tech transfer, illegal subsidies, banning foreign suppliers, dumping, etc. The chip industry's supplyl-chain mostly exists in the West.

experiencedreview

ONDA doesn’t have any drone IP or production capability that provides any value

IntelligentMarch6827

Microsoft’s cloud offering sucks, and the core business is threatened because it’s all about seats that will be eliminated by AI. Their delivery of copilot hasn’t been a rousing success. Oracle is fully leveraged and the legacy business is predicated on high friction for customers which AI dramatically reduces.  Amazon is selling services but doesn’t own the IP. Google is vertically integrated. They own the facilities, models, applications, user accounts and gatekeepers for the internet.  They own the consumer AI journey end to end and deliver value with AI natively with Google.  They own pieces of Anthropic and SpaceX. When Claude wins, they win. When Grok sells capacity of PR nightmare dirty data centers, they win. They have  huge customer base that can easily consume enterprise AI APIs. The tech itself moves so quickly you need to think of the big picture. In January, Gemini was king. Today, Anthropic is the mindshare winner.

bensquirrel

lower P/E? different business structure? more IP potential? you're simplifying these companies a lot when you just call them "hyperscalers"

gizamo

When Samsung sues CXMT for their obvious IP theft, CXMT will sue Samsung in China's kangaroo courts for the exact same thing. Then, China's courts will threaten to block Samsung from operating in China until they drop their lawsuit against CXMT. That's exactly what China did when Fujian/UMC blatantly ripped off Micron tech. China strong armed Micron into settling out of court, and they basically got nothing. Any company doing any semiconductor business with China is just asking to get their products ripped off and undercut. They do it at every step in the supply chain, too. It's insane that any US companies are still in China at this point.

weHaveThoughts

I understand the difference between fission and fusion. I would love to see fission reactors but TAE doesn’t have anything close to being viable. TAE is a research lab leasing their IP just like 100 Universities. Leasing IP doesn’t generate $10 billion in revenue and they are at least 15 years away from having anything viable in terms of a fission reactor. It’s another con. Just like everything else in the Trump portfolio.

Stellar_Impulse

kK biggest problem seems to be their 800 million+ debt rather than their revenue. Am I crazy to believe that this could put them in a way more favorable position? Sure there are royalties or licensing fees, but....its FREAKING POKEMON!?! The most profitable IP in history. Bigger than Marvel or SW. And hitting during a period where its collectibles are highly sought after.

SoCallMeDeaconBlues1

😂 You have no idea how IP law works.

OverEchidna

They're not a scam, which is more than I can say for some companies posted on here. I like the revenue growth, and it's quite possible they start inking some serious contracts later in the year. I would like to see their contracts, to make sure they're keeping a % of the IP. Thanks for sharing.

MitchCurry

I went to EDGAR for the first time today and opened one 20-F. I then tried to open a second one... >Your request rate has exceeded the SEC’s maximum allowable requests per second. Your access to SEC.gov will be limited for 10 minutes. Current guidelines limit each user to a total of no more than 10 requests per second, regardless of the number of machines used to submit requests. To ensure that SEC.gov remains available to all users, we reserve the right to block IP addresses that submit excessive requests. So how did one 20-F opening show them >10 requests?

HigherGroundHoonigan

This has been posted on here multiple times. I suppose I can repeat it once more. Trulieve completed their Redomicile from Canada to Delaware this week. Trading platforms have to update things on their end to reflect that. The long string of numbers is a placeholder tied directly to the shares (think of it like an IP Address rather than a Domain Name such as 'reddit.com'). Once everything is updated on the trading platform, the current price, and ticker symbol, will be updated. Different platforms operate at different speeds but it's expected to take "1-3 days". Be patient. Or, utilize the support/chat function on your trading platform to ask THEM.

Sufficient_Habit5091

>*Echoing Palworld dev, video game lawyer says all her clients have anti-AI contracts because gamers hate it and it's a copyright landmine: "I think we're going to see lawsuits"* >Video game lawyer Haley MacLean has seen such a sharp rise in anti-AI wording in the game dev and publisher contracts she reviews that virtually "all" of her clients now explicitly oppose the tech. >Speaking with GamesRadar+, MacLean, a corporate IP lawyer and head of video game practice at Voyer Law, explains just how common clauses banning generative AI have become. >**MacLean frequently deals with publishing agreements for "indie up to AA" studios. These spell out "the services that the publisher is going to offer in exchange for [revenue] share." And in these agreements, more developers and publishers are pushing to completely forbid any use of generative AI, she says.** >"It's turned around, especially in the past year. I would say about two to three-ish years ago, you'd see a little bit of it," she says of anti-AI clauses. "But in this last year alone, it's gone from being in a decent chunk of agreements, maybe the more risk-averse publishers are sticking in 'no gen AI' clauses, and sort of trickled down to, 'The big guys are doing it. We should do it too.'

Sufficient_Habit5091

>*Echoing Palworld dev, video game lawyer says all her clients have anti-AI contracts because gamers hate it and it's a copyright landmine: "I think we're going to see lawsuits"* >Video game lawyer Haley MacLean has seen such a sharp rise in anti-AI wording in the game dev and publisher contracts she reviews that virtually "all" of her clients now explicitly oppose the tech. >Speaking with GamesRadar+, MacLean, a corporate IP lawyer and head of video game practice at Voyer Law, explains just how common clauses banning generative AI have become. >**MacLean frequently deals with publishing agreements for "indie up to AA" studios**. These spell out "the services that the publisher is going to offer in exchange for [revenue] share." And in these agreements, more developers and publishers are pushing to completely forbid any use of generative AI, she says. "It's turned around, especially in the past year. I would say about two to three-ish years ago, you'd see a little bit of it," she says of anti-AI clauses. "But in this last year alone, it's gone from being in a decent chunk of agreements, maybe the more risk-averse publishers are sticking in 'no gen AI' clauses, and sort of trickled down to, 'The big guys are doing it. We should do it too.'

stuff_happens_again

HTZ when IP

GeoLogic23

I don't like buybacks, but i also don't think they'll have quite as much integration costs as you would think a company would after having made so many acquisitions. Definitely should have some. I just don't think it's going to be crazy. It's mostly just Florida and Colorado that have significant amounts to integrate. A lot of other are small entries into other states. https://www.reddit.com/r/weedstocks/s/Chx7ZdLNTT Their strategy is more like a collective of single state operators who operate independently. Then just adding on things like delivery, brands, and other IP to give them a boost. I really want to see their next move in Illinois. Need to add more there. My first guess is the rest of Revolution's assets.

CosmosMasterMan

Fair point! On one hand, it's a speculative illiquid asset that will go on grinding up or down as long as there are servers with records of the leger, on the other hand, my most risky holding, CNTX is trading under a dollar and is a binary bet on oncology IP that had about a year of solid funding until more resources are on the books. So I do have a bias about crypto, that much is evident.

CosmosMasterMan

somebody's not familiar with the IP ;)

CosmosMasterMan

Should I put my $1.00 Dividend from Visa into ASML or gamble more on CNTX oncology IP pipeline breaking out?

Exquisite-Load8654

Then someone gets their (OpenAI) IP for pennies on the dollar. It’s honestly a dream scenario if that happens. And it’s likely Microsoft will get first dibs.

CosmosMasterMan

Dig into their IP, the moat is wide on future Q infrastructure

CosmosMasterMan

Yeah for Pharma/Medtech I run ISRG, DSNKY and LLY, with a small bet on CNTX because of valuable IP.

Freedom-Of-Trades

So if the court decides thst anthopic got it's smarts from us regards, how much does anthropic owe each of us for our IP?

interwebzdotnet

Defense/government is 54% of their business, 46% is commercial,and it's growing fast. Commercial will probably be the majority of the business within another 3 quarters or so. The negative attention isn't the reason behind the stock price dip. It pulled back as the whole AI sector pulled back,and as per usual it was because people don't understand what they do. The companies that just build our AI at a loss,and the companies that were just throwing tokens($$$) at business problems are why there was a narrative that AI wasnt generating revenue, meanwhile thats all Palantir was doing ..generating revenue. They also strongly called out the fact that the LLMs and a lot of other AI companies require the surrender of data to the models,and loss of IP just to use AI, which is very true,just not for Palantir. They get lumped in with the cash burn of generic AI spend,but are a complete different animal,and people still don't understand that.

vanderchief

agreed with most of your statement however: >Thats before you begin looking at the fact youre giving your IP to another company. But don't they have contracts for that exactly? If that really was an issue no company would use any cloud services like AWS, Azure, ... Or am I mixing things up?

No_Feeling920

These two companies have very little moat. If they go under, someone can pick up their IP for pennies on the dollar and try operating it in a profitable way. If that's not possible, their models could get open sourced for anyone to self-host. Or just switch to a different model vendor (Meta, XAI, DeepSeek etc.). Whoever had HW supply or lease agreements with these two will have to find a different customer for the ordered stuff. This is not what I understand as concentration.

PeopleCallMeSimon

Only someone who doesnt understand why AI is a bubble would write this comment. AI isnt a bubble because there isnt an interest in AI. Same as the dot com bubble wasnt a bubble because there was no interest in the internet. They are/were both bubbles because a ton more money is getting pumped into the industry than could ever possibly come out of it. Companies like ChatGPT make less money the more people use their platform. They are currently covering it up by putting the associated costs under "marketing" because they claim all current usage is just advertising their product. They are hoping they can cash out on an IP before its too late, or make some kind of critcal breakthrough that solves this issue before its too late.

Onotadaki2

The bubble "bursting" is the transition from the onboarding period we're in now to where they're charging what it actually costs to run this all. There will be AI use before and after, sure. The issue is that all of a sudden you won't be able to code 9-5 on subscriptions that are $150/month and you're paying $5,000/month in API costs. This will still be cheaper than humans if you look at the speed and quality, so they won't transition back to humans, everyone will reduce their worforces and eat the $5,000/month per employee as a cost of business. Companies that use LLM APIs for stuff like chatbots on sites will suddenly be facing 10x the costs to operate that they were the month prior and their entire business model will collapse because no company will spend what it now costs for their services. This will suddenly drop out 80%+ of the companies in the AI space as they're completely unprofitable with the new pricing models. As these companies collapse, OpenAI, Anthropic and Grok will gobble up all the little guy's IP and integrate their services into the frontier models.

Oldboy_Finland

We use IP / internet based services now like dot.com companies envisioned we’d do over 25 years a go. Back then it was said to happen everywhere immediately, it took quite long to actually happen. Most of free AI usage is something that only few people are willing to pay a monthly fee right now, some will, but I’m inclined to believe that actual take off time for paid usage can be quite long for big masses.

saheel1511

He did that because he had lost the Closed Source fight already, not out of goodness of his heart. He wanted to commoditize the IP.  Kinda like what Google did with Android to compete with Apple. But it didn't work out as well. Because OpenAI/Anthropic kept improving the models like crazy. 

SidewaysFancyPrance

Honestly, I've lost a lot of faith in our systems and this doesn't impress/excite me at all. Apache 2.0 doesn't mean much IMO. Mark just needs to cut Trump a check and suddenly the rules are changed and he has the DOJ on his side, prosecuting his opponents and protecting his IP. No thanks.

DireStraitsFan1

Problem is there are open source options that are just as good and they do not steal your IP.

jcooper_murica

As everyone here has pointed out, there’s a big difference between Ai being a useful technology and the current state of the Fronteir companies and hyperscalers and whether the massive investment in it will result in sustainable profitable companies. The current “bet” by investors essentially requires AGI (the version of that word that has Ai able to do most current jobs we pay humans to do) at the same level or better than a human, to justify the huge debt taken on for the infrastructure and R&D. First, we havent gotten there yet and its highly speculative that they ever will. The fronteir labs’ “plan” to get there is recursive self improvement, a separate milestone that no one has gotten to yet. Add that to that the large, previously very liquid companies backing much of the actual cost of all the investment have all taken on debt levels (both on book and off) that are orders of magnitude larger than other “bubbles” and the circular nature of much if the money the companies involved are booking as revenue, and it is difficult to conclude it’s not a bubble that will burst. But this bubble bursting doesn’t mean the underlying technology isn’t real and isn’t here to stay. It just means that OpenAi and Anthropic and Xai (or spacexai oe whatever it’s called now) are likely to implode prior to realizing their stated objectives with Meta, Microsoft, Google, Amazon, Oracle and Nvidia likely to have huge losses. Then a few parties who have liquidity when it all implodes will come in and buy up the IP and whatever parts of the infrastructure still have value for Pennies compared to the current cost, and they’ll be the ones to make large profits off of it.

snorlax42meow

Seems good. They were fire selling projects and IP to finance build out and now just riding AI hype and get to raise cash.

MitchCurry

You only read the headlines and not the articles. Allbirds sold all its IP and eqiupment and inventories to American Exchange Group. The remaining shell company was basically sold/converted into an AI company called Smartbird. No leadership from Allbirds stayed on. There was no actual pivot. Basically the BIRD ticket was sold for nothing to other people who started an AI company. The headlines saying Allbirds was pivoting to AI was ragebait.

Strong_as_an_axe

Lots of enterprise is already limiting use because of token costs and they’re currently not priced at a profit. Thats before you begin looking at the fact youre giving your IP to another company. If it is likely that investing in infrastructure for local inference and then hosting an open weights model etc. makes much more sense in the long run. Particularly since it looks like LLMs have plateaued.

Top-Positive6537

AIMN near lows watching here for a swing. Aimwell Partners reaches agreement in principle to acquire \~$10M in IP to supercharge AimwellBio’s verified healthcare intelligence platform. Building the trust layer AI in biopharma desperately needs.

crankthehandle

It's short-sighted to call the entire metaverse story a failure. Lots and lots went into hardware and they probably produced tons of IP used in their products now. But yeah, in the end he is mostly good at scaling things. Not too worried honestly, he will find a way.

fomoandyoloandnogrow

Can they reboot looney toons already. Warner bros not using IP effectively

realribsnotmcfibs

You think buying stock in the company will give you the rights to their IP?

Mother___Night

ai is going to implode. Aside from the fact AI is the worlds biggest IP litigation time bomb, which is one big reason apple has stayed clear, and why google has willfully restrained what it allows its models to be trained on--AI, especially LLMs just aren't going to get much better and/or useful from where they are now.

batistuta_pso

30 people + hundreds of outsourced workers. Rockstar doesnt have all of their people on a single game, they have multiple studios + GTA is an IP like no other. It will be the most sold game of all times when it releases on PC .

keknado

Agree with photonics. COHR and LITE leading the charge. An exciting microcap in the space is Aeluma (ALMU) They are solving the power and bandwidth bottlenecks of AI data centers by replacing traditional copper interconnects with light. They do this through a proprietary manufacturing platform that grows high-performance photonic devices (like photodetectors and lasers) on standard, large-diameter 300mm silicon substrates, providing a cheaper, scalable, non-indium-phosphide alternative. Recognized as critical infrastructure for the domestic compute supply chain, Aeluma recently signed a Letter of Intent for up to **$30 million in U.S. CHIPS Act R&D funding** to scale its Goleta, CA facility and U.S. foundry operations. While operating as an independent IP and component developer, Aeluma sits at the heart of key semiconductor plays: its integrated light sources offer the missing foundational hardware for **Nvidia’s** push into co-packaged optics (CPO) and sub-2 pJ/bit optical I/O, while presenting a modern, monolithic 300mm alternative to **Intel’s** legacy bonded silicon photonics architectures.

RedPlumpTomato

My AI Slop Analysis: AMIX — HARD AVOID Let me explain what the fuck you just watched. On July 28 Autonomix Medical disclosed $5.1 million in cash, 971,043 shares outstanding, and a freshly filed shelf registration to sell more stock — and at $2.75 a share the whole goddamn company was worth $2.67 million, which is less than the cash sitting in their fucking checking account. The stock ripped 66% on July 29, gave most of it back, and sat at $3.44 on August 3. Then the company dropped a patent press release — U.S. Patent No. 12,433,670, nerve sensing and neural mapping for pancreatic, prostate, breast, colon, liver, ovarian, and bone cancers — legitimate IP, genuinely meaningful technology. And at the exact same moment the SEC declared their ATM shelf registration effective, meaning they could now legally dump fresh shares into whatever rally the patent news created. Same fucking day, not a coincidence, by design. The stock went from $3.44 to $19.50 in one session. By August 5 it had already shit back 37.6%. The machine that creates press releases to pump prices to sell stock into is running exactly as intended, and you are 343% behind the people it was built to feed. The dilution history is what tells you what this company actually is. From March 2025 to December 2025 it tripled its share count — 2.5 million shares to 11.4 million — while generating zero fucking revenue. It was surviving by selling its own stock the way other companies sell products, except product sales don't torch your shareholders. By January 2026 the share price had collapsed so badly Nasdaq sent a formal delisting notice. The fix: a 1-for-21 reverse split on June 24 that turned 11.4 million shares into 543,000 and made Nasdaq happy without the business earning a single dollar. Three weeks later they needed cash again. A warrant deal printed 428,731 new shares and pulled in $2.57 million, plus loaded 857,462 warrants into the pipeline for the next round of screwing. The ATM shelf that went live August 4 stacks on top of all of it. This isn't a company that has a product and ran into trouble — it's a stock-selling operation that happens to be doing some science on the side. Brad Hauser, the CEO, is not a fake. At Zeltiq he helped scale CoolSculpting into a $2.4 billion Allergan buyout. Then he ran Soliton straight into another Allergan acquisition. The man has two legitimate medtech exits on his resume and the Rolodex to potentially walk this platform into a third. None of that changes the one fucking thing that matters: Brad Hauser has not bought a single share of Autonomix with his own money in the 14 months he has been running this company. Not at the pre-pump lows. Not at any price. The entire insider base — every officer, every director, every person with access to the real clinical data and the burn-rate projections — collectively owns 0.02% of outstanding shares and has put zero personal cash in for two straight years. These are the people who know whether this technology actually works. Their verdict, expressed through 24 months of doing absolutely nothing with their own brokerage accounts, is that it is not worth buying at any price it has traded at. That's not a small detail. At a pre-revenue company with no product sales and no FDA clearance, insider conviction is the only real internal signal you have, and it is screaming at you. At $12.17 you are paying an $11.8 million market cap for $5.1 million in cash, zero revenue, no FDA clearance, nine months of runway before the next mandatory capital raise, 857,000 warrants worth of dilution sitting in the queue, and a live ATM shelf that can dump into any rally at any time. What you are actually paying for the business — after you subtract the cash — is $6.7 million. That buys you preclinical animal-model data on renal nerve sensing, some impressive conference podium presentations that are already months in the rearview mirror, and a CEO who has twice proven he can get acquired but won't put his own money behind it here. Every catalyst that existed for this name has already fired. There is nothing on the calendar. If you caught this at $3.44 on August 3, you had a hell of a day and the only question now is how fast you get out. If you are reading about it today, you did not identify an opportunity — you are the liquidity that lets the people who did walk away clean. HARD AVOID. \---

FrostingOk2692

they can rent cars to deliver the data physically instead of using them interwebs. It's like IP over Avian Carriers 2.0

pattymcfly

Fuck patent sitters and trolls. They are vampires on innovation. Pure IP plays are not what the patent system intended.

Grogbarrell

I mean technically it’s software vs software. I would gander AI companies may steal more IP than anyone else, patents or no

Reaper_1492

There’s a substantial amount of middle-corporate-America that doesn’t have the resources to vet the safety of open weight models - or run them air-gapped but stack connected. There’s no way those companies are handing their data to deepseek/china. It’s just not going to happen. And if you see enough fortune 500’s start doing this, there’s a real chance the administration steps in to kill the flow of revenue to Chinese providers. Not to mention China has a really terrible habit of building malware into its own products to siphon data and IP. It’s really a dumb move geo-politically to allow them to take over here, free market aside.

jakfischer

Worked for 35s I dug into the actual court record and Acacia’s SEC filings. **There is a legitimate trade here, but the Reddit author is overstating how close we are to knowing the payout.** The strongest part of the thesis is actually **ACTG itself**, not the giant Databricks damages number. At March 31, 2026, Acacia had **$307.5M cash**, $321.7M including equity securities, roughly **$91M of long-term credit-facility debt**, and **$528.5M of equity attributable to Acacia shareholders**. With 96.59M shares outstanding, accounting book value is about **$5.47/share**. ACTG has recently traded around **$4.40–$4.60**, so you're buying it below reported book value. That's meaningful. # The Databricks lawsuit is definitely real R2 Solutions filed the Databricks patent case in the Eastern District of Texas. The patent is **US 8,190,610, “MapReduce for Distributed Database Processing,”** originally assigned to Yahoo. And R2 has scored some genuinely favorable pretrial rulings. In February, Judge Amos Mazzant: * granted both R2 motions to strike, * denied Databricks' motion to strike R2's supplemental infringement material, * denied Databricks' supplemental claim-construction request. That's better than WSB fluff. Those things actually happened. The case is also very far along. The current docket has a **final pretrial conference scheduled for August 27, 2026**. So this isn't some patent application that *might* result in litigation five years from now. It's sitting essentially at the courthouse door. # But here's the giant caveat Those February victories **are procedural/evidentiary wins, not a jury finding that Databricks infringes a valid patent and owes $200M**. That distinction matters enormously. And there is a particularly important issue still being fought: **Databricks' license defense**. The public docket shows briefing this spring on R2's motion for partial summary judgment regarding Databricks' license defenses. That's basically the issue the Reddit author summarizes as: > If Databricks successfully establishes that its accused use is licensed, the sexy damages thesis can collapse. There's also the §101 patent-eligibility attack mentioned in the post. So I would absolutely **not** treat the litigation as 80–90% won just because R2 has been doing well on motions. # What could the lawsuit actually do to ACTG? There are **96.59M shares**. That makes the math beautifully simple: |Net cash ACTG ultimately receives|Value/share| |:-|:-| |$25M|**$0.26**| |$50M|**$0.52**| |$75M|**$0.78**| |$100M|**$1.04**| |$150M|**$1.55**| |$200M|**$2.07**| |$250M|**$2.59**| |$500M|**$5.18**| But notice I said **net cash ACTG receives**. The Reddit guy uses gross lawsuit numbers a little too casually. Acacia's own SEC filing explicitly says its IP cost of revenue includes things such as **inventor royalties, contingent legal fees, litigation expenses and licensing expenses.** Therefore: **$150M settlement ≠ $150M increase in ACTG equity.** We don't publicly know the exact economic arrangement associated with this particular portfolio. For rough investment modeling, I'd haircut gross recoveries substantially. Suppose ACTG economically keeps **65%** after applicable sharing/legal costs. That's only an illustrative assumption—not something I've found disclosed for R2. Then: |Gross Databricks resolution|Illustrative ACTG net|Per ACTG share| |:-|:-|:-| |$50M|$32.5M|**$0.34**| |$100M|$65M|**$0.67**| |$150M|$97.5M|**$1.01**| |$200M|$130M|**$1.35**| |$250M|$162.5M|**$1.68**| |$500M|$325M|**$3.36**| That table is much closer to how I'd think about the trade. # What ACTG is worth WITHOUT Databricks This is where I actually become more interested. At $4.50-ish, ACTG's market cap is roughly: **96.59M × $4.50 ≈ $435M.** Yet reported Acacia shareholder equity is **$528.5M**. That's: **$5.47 book value/share.** And you're paying roughly: **0.82× book value.** Acacia also isn't merely an empty patent shell. It has four reporting segments: **Intellectual Property, Industrial, Energy and Manufacturing.** At March 31, segment assets were approximately $252M IP, $53M industrial, $215M energy and $124M manufacturing. So the Reddit phrase "you're basically buying the lawsuit for free" is too strong. But there **is some truth behind it**: > That's a materially different investment from paying some absurd premium solely because a patent trial is coming. # My ACTG valuation I'd think of it like this. # Bad outcome Databricks wins/license defense succeeds/patent falls apart. The market may punish ACTG because speculative buyers leave. I'd put a plausible trading range around: **$3.50–$4.25** Not zero. ACTG still owns the cash, other IP portfolios and operating businesses. # Nothingburger / small settlement Suppose R2 gets something but ACTG ultimately realizes only $25–50M economically. My range: **$4.50–$5.50** Basically mildly positive but not transformative. # Good settlement Something around **$100–150M net to ACTG**. That's approximately another $1.04–$1.55/share of real economic value. I could see: **$5.75–$7.00** particularly because the market may start assigning more value to the remaining IP portfolio. # Big victory $200–250M **net** economic value. Now you've added $2.07–$2.59/share. Something like: **$7–$9+** doesn't look crazy. # WSB zombie apocalypse Hundreds of millions from Databricks followed by a broad licensing campaign against other large data companies. Could ACTG get to **$10+?** Mathematically, yes. But this is the part I would assign a **small probability**, not build the investment around. # There's one thing I particularly like Acacia's IP business really is incredibly lumpy. Q1 2025 IP revenue was **$69.9M**. Q1 2026: **$722,000.** That's wild, but it illustrates exactly what this business is. One settlement can radically alter a quarter. Acacia itself warns that patent litigation can last years and that even favorable interim rulings or verdicts may not predict the ultimate resolution because of appeals and other processes. So don't value ACTG on normal quarterly EPS. You're essentially valuing: **cash + operating assets + portfolio of legal claims.** # My probability-weighted take If I were building the position rather than writing a WSB post, I'd use something approximately like: **45%:** Databricks produces little/no meaningful value **25%:** modest outcome **20%:** strong $100M+ type economic result **8%:** very large result **2%:** the broader patent campaign becomes enormously valuable Those aren't court-derived probabilities—they're my conservative framework given the unresolved merits/license issues. That means I'd buy ACTG only if I were comfortable owning **ACTG without Databricks**. And at roughly **$4.40–$4.60 versus $5.47 reported book value**, I actually think you can make a reasonable argument for exactly that. # Bottom line I started this thinking the Reddit post was probably **90% WSB pump**. After checking it: **I don't think it's bullshit.** I'd characterize it more like: **70% legitimate special-situation thesis + 30% wildly optimistic damages fan fiction.** The **$120–275M estimates have essentially no verifiable basis because the damages material is sealed**. That's the weak part. But **ACTG around $4.50 ahead of an August 27 final pretrial conference is legitimately interesting**, because you aren't paying a $2B valuation for the lottery ticket. You're paying below reported book for a \~$435M company that already has substantial cash/assets, while getting a real and unusually advanced patent case as optionality. **Shares make substantially more sense to me than short-dated calls.** The lawsuit can settle, get delayed, go to verdict, go through post-trial motions, or spend years on appeal. Acacia itself explicitly warns that these cases can last years. If I were looking at actually putting money into it, **$4.25–$4.50 shares would interest me a lot more than trying to nail the trial with options.** And **August 27 is now the date I'd watch closely.**

Open_Pollution_8038

Here’s my issue with the “hyperscaler ” business of renting out these datacenter: How is this not a low margin, commodity style service after all of this gets built? None of them own the IP for the hardware, you have Google and Broadcom trying to crack Nvidia’s market but it’s subpar for in comparison.  I just don’t see a world where the hyperscaler continue reaping mad margin on being a middleman essentially. To throw more gas into the fire, if AI tools become the dominant way we interact with computers then Microsoft and Google’s core legacy businesses (where they still get most of their profits and margins) are under existential threat.

elgrandorado

$7974/NTDOY (Nintendo) "Nintendo reported first-quarter results on Thursday that topped revenue and profit estimates, even as Switch 2 console hardware sales fell 34.4% from the year-ago period to 3.82 million units. Revenue for the quarter ended June 30 came in at 517.8 billion yen. That topped analyst expectations of 444.96 billion yen, according to CNBC. Net profit rose 53.5% year-over-year to 147.4 billion yen, beating analyst expectations of 78.30 billion yen. Operating profit climbed 150.5% to 142.5 billion yen, the company said. A key contributor was roughly $300 million in refunds of tariffs levied under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, which Nintendo recorded as a reduction of cost of sales. The company said those tariff costs had been borne by Nintendo rather than passed on to consumers through product prices. The year-ago quarter marked the Switch 2's launch, making the hardware comparison difficult. Nintendo noted that despite the hardware decline, buyers continued to pick up the Switch 2, with new title releases helping sustain momentum, and that the system's first-quarter sell-through tracked ahead of where the original Switch stood at the same point in its second year. Sales of the original Nintendo Switch also declined, falling 31.8% to 0.66 million units. On the software side, Nintendo Switch 2 titles sold 9.46 million units, up 9.2% year-over-year. Nintendo Switch software rose 38.6% to 33.81 million units. Tomodachi Life: Living the Dream led sales with 7.94 million units, while Pokémon Pokopia sold 1.27 million units in the quarter. IP-related income more than doubled to 34.8 billion yen, driven in part by The Super Mario Galaxy Movie, which Nintendo said has generated more than $1 billion in global box office revenue since its April 1 release, making it the second-highest grossing film ever based on a video game. Nintendo left its full-year outlook intact, with net sales still projected at 2.05 trillion yen and net profit at 310 billion yen through March 2027. The company said it has factored in approximately 100 billion yen in costs from higher component prices, particularly for memory, and tariff measures. For the full fiscal year, Nintendo expects Switch 2 hardware to reach 16.5 million units, which would represent a roughly 17% retreat from the prior year's total. Nintendo stock closed 2.87% higher ahead of the earnings release" Seems like demand pull forward and tariff refunds are the story here for Nintendo. There was an expectation that total sales for the Switch 2 would decline this FY due to increased prices. The pressure is on execution risk for their game releases, but it's the type of risk Nintendo excels at. They issued typical conservative Nintendo guidance which they'll beat as well. Fine quarter, but I honestly can't wait for this semi cycle to unwind and for prices to normalize.

Maximum-Side-9391

Only thing China is good at is stealing our IP soon their economy will crumble once a generation of door dashers are in adulthood

socialbatteringram

They already acquired valuable IP from a German memory manufacturer. In certain product lines if they’re JEDEC standard they can already by default go toe to toe with the big three.

killamasta

NLST just signed agreement with Samsung for their memory IP patents after years of litigation. SK Hynix renewal is also coming up soon. NLST has IP for MU, GOOG, SKHY, Samsung. Hop on board. We popped off 60% today

wcked-husky

IP is really valuable

kinkycarbon

Their financials. I do not see a pocket monster as a graphic in their earnings presentation. Even though Nintendo owns 32% of TPCi, the revenue Nintendo pulls from cards doesn’t match yearly software sales and IP deals such as films. It’s been pointed out to me in the past Nintendo’s profit is mostly software. Their focus has been their Core IP. Pokemon isn’t their Core. TPCi is a separate entity. The cards TPCi makes are pennies in value. They don’t earn any profit from secondary market.

pojosamaneo

Such ignorance is staggering. Toxic culture? They honor their employees and gave them raises while the industry at large is terminating employees. They retain teams, which is literally the only way to have continued success over decades. Their IP are only still relevant because they keep getting better. Nobody makes games with the quality level of Nintendo.

ImnTheGreat

i would protect it too if I had IP like that

Confident_Tree42

Yeah which has created a lot of baggage, a toxic culture, horrible PR, corporate bloat, and too big to fail level arrogance. A company with well established IP can survive with those things going against them but they can't thrive. Their long term growth prospects are effectively zero

Hannibal20

For me its less about the "console wars" more about the IP that Nintendo has right to. Seems undervalued based on that.

Open_Pollution_8038

Nobody cares about China’s AI progress. They’ll never be allowed to sell it to the west, which is where all the money is. They’ll never make any money domestically because everyone just steals IP in China. NVDA, GOOGL to the moon.

Prax150

If you perceive that I'm not arguing against anything you're saying it's because what you're saying doesn't really make any sense. You also haven't really addressed most of my points, just keep yammering about the same thingt hat you can't prove lol There's no way you can prove that not having IMAX would have made The Odyssey more money. Of course regular theaters were less full but that doesn't prove anything. IMAX tickets cost a lot more, and like you said people were lining up in the middle of the night at times where they're not going to see regular format showings in droves. You'd have to take the attendance from all imax theaters not only for the first three weeks but for the weeks to come (information you don't have), double it to account for the higher ticket prices, and then likely double it again for all the off-peak hours showtimes, and then find a way to account for the opportunity cost of people who may have been turned off from seeing it early since they couldn't get access to those special theatres. We're also talking about like 40 rooms across the world. Most people aren't affected by this anyway! And I'm not trying to compare this to Spider-Man or its performance. You can't. One is long established superhero IP with broad appeal that broke all-time box office records. The other a 3-hour R-rated epic from an adult filmmaker where the special format was part of the marketing that defied expectations. And even in the face of the biggest opening weekend of all time it made $50 million. That's kind of unheard of. To argue that having a format that was a special attraction and got people even more excited to see it hurt it is ridiculous and baseless. And if the industry was about maximizing butts in seats there wouldn't be ANY special formats and tickets would be a lot cheaper. It's more complicated than that. That also has nothing to do with what i'm saying when I'm arguing that the IMAX corporation wants to attract more filmmakers to film in their special format. It doesn't have to be the guy who made Spider-Man, it could be 2-3 more people like Chris Nolan.

Zef-Daytrade

no, cost savings in training is NOT the same as cost savings in operation. The training with frontier models does not save in the operation side... no amount of using of frontier models will save in compute requirements. Give credit to the programmers man. SMCI don't blame china for that. Thats purely the excs fault for doing something illegal. China has an order out on the market, waiting to be filled, its the trade specialists that know what to fill or not. The execs KNEW they are doing it illegally, . This is a trade specialists (ie import/export/sourcing/trade manager) job to know the rules and they get paid handsomely for it 100k-200k is common and 300k and above is not unhead of. ASML China stealing IP because hiring the employee they fired? Really? It is also the same for virtually all the employees fired in the lasts 4 years with the China/Chinese crackdown in the USA.... across the board yet no one is claiming IP theft in those fields due to hiring but only tech.

Zef-Daytrade

IBM is a good example, just didnt know how to profit from its R&D (and sold off many stuff IP like say Thinkpad which dominates the business world today) hence it is only so low in marketcap. SpaceX dont seem to have that problem in the profit side....

Zef-Daytrade

Legally on the China side is more US export controls. Outside of China, Legally likely the ToS cannot protect it in courts being 1 fair use laws, 2 courts many times have already outputs is NOT protected by law. Both will likely trump their ToS, but until it goes in the court ill just nod my head. 3 its how well the company protects its IP being what constitutes as "fine tuning" and what consists as "distillation" is a very narrow line that none of them have really explained even in their ToS (minus anything related to China will automatically be upgraded distillation regardless of what actually happened, so ill take that worth a grain of salt and being the US Export Control takes precedence here none of the ToS matters in China's case)

BeyondAppropriate857

Incredibly hard. ASTS is well positioned with their IP, existing functional satellites, and the largest phased arrays ever put in space.

Eastern-Joke-7537

IP-2-O is not just my 3rd favorite Star Wars droid! 😂

cuteman

> And as I said, if they were worried about consumer infosec, the law would have targeted source code and validated network usage. Impossible to police. >And if this law has been about manufacturing, it would have focused on incentivizing the building and development of new factories. Doesn't it? It requires domestic production. >I didn't claim to consumer robots weren't infosec risks; anyone with a Shark robot vacuum and the knowledge to run Wireshark could already confirm this. I didn't claim the off shoring US manufacturing wasn't a mistake (it was), but if you want to be competitive in manufacturing anything (including more than just more robots, commercial or otherwise), then you first need to import foreign robots to equip your factories. It's a slow process that took 30-40 years of offshoring and can't be reversed overnight. >You don't see China banning the import of all lithography machines just because they want to build their own Well, they can't they're extremely mission critical and impossible to steal/replicate they tried >and worried about foreign IP theft of their CPU designs No one wants to steal Chinese CPU designs or IP >Quite the opposite; they try to acquire the latest lithography machines by any means possible. Because they need them and can't steal the IP. It's like saying they won't ban fuel for electricity, no shit, they don't have enough of their own to survive without external sources. >In the mean time, the Chinese government will continue to support their R&D, on the off chance they figure it out and leapfrog foreign made machines on their own. Through constant IP theft and attempts to replicate what other's have already invented.

McFlyParadox

And as I said, if they were worried about consumer infosec, the law would have targeted source code and validated network usage. And if this law has been about manufacturing, it would have focused on incentivizing the building and development of new factories. But it did neither of those things.  I didn't claim to consumer robots weren't infosec risks; anyone with a Shark robot vacuum and the knowledge to run Wireshark could already confirm this. I didn't claim the off shoring US manufacturing *wasn't* a mistake (it was), but if you want to be competitive in manufacturing anything (including more than just more robots, commercial or otherwise), then you first need to import foreign robots to equip your factories. You don't see China banning the import of all lithography machines just because they want to build their own and worried about foreign IP theft of their CPU designs. Quite the opposite; they try to acquire the latest lithography machines by any means possible. In the mean time, the Chinese government will continue to support their R&D, on the off chance they figure it out and leapfrog foreign made machines on their own.

jeffynihao

The memory comes from Korea not China. Things like IP substrates come from China.

FlaTCB

Sorry, I may have misunderstood from our prior conversation. Do you not allow sharing a post from another community, is that the issue? Should I have just posted it here? If so, you can make your Community not allow that, as it is, it does allow. With regard to the flagging for suspicious behavior. What accounts are you accusing me of having. I have only one. I believe each of my posts are educational, relevant, and professional. I cannot say the same for the person reporting and frankly you either. Are you reading what is written. Also, what are you threatening me with? A statewide IP ban? Sir, respectfully, if you are the creator of this Community and you prefer hostility and the shit posts that my respectful posts get then that is your prerogative. But, if you want to accuse me of things, maybe this is not a community issue, but something Reddit should be aware of how you operate.

xyzqwa

They need new IP but that's risky to develop. Disney played it safe for too long and squandered what they had in bad direction.

mammalian_alien

I'll definitely save this comment because I think you're wrong. Godzilla has the draw of children, weebs, and oldheads. The last two monsterverse films made roughly $500M, and this upcoming one has the advantage of momentum from Toho's Godzilla Minus Zero coming out this November, which is also a guaranteed hit. The Legend of Zelda movie has the draw of children and gamers of all ages, as this movie will be the first of its kind. The Super Mario Movie made $1.3B, and its sequel made $1B. Legend of Zelda is the next biggest IP Nintendo has besides Super Mario. Do the math. Resurrection of Christ... Yeah, Christian fanbase. Nuff said. Passion of Christ made $600M on a $30M budget. Conservative evangelicals in America are addicted to being grifted these days. They're gonna throw money at this money like its a basket in church. Spiderverse is obviously going to be a hit, its Spiderman. Spiderman prints money, and the end of the Spiderverse trilogy has been a long time coming. Numerically, the first Spiderverse did $390M, and part 2 did $690M. The Mummy 4, easy hit. Its banks on both nostalgia and Brendan Frasers comeback. Frozen 3. Frozen 1 made $1.2B, Frozen 2 made $1.4B. Frozen 3 is going to make a minimum of a billion in its theatrical run and you're delusional to believe otherwise. Avengers Secret Wars... it's an Avengers movie. I'll admit, the success of Secret Wars largely depends on how Doomsday turns out, but even if its ass, Marvel movies have massive audiences who will turn out to theaters just to hate on it. The Gollum movie I'll admit is a hit or miss. All depends on what they're cooking.

gryffon5147

Kids just aren't that into Disney. Just feels very much boomer, Gen X and part of the millenials thing. Stuck in the endless culture war - creatives want to go hard left, much of its customer base is traditional. International markets and regions developing their own IP. A lot of the new ideas have been busts, and there's only so much money you can squeeze from parks and locations.

BlackPlasmaX

Boomer companies run by boomer people and a ceo from the parks division thinking hes now a tech guy because he pitched the partnership with epic games. When have you last seen disney last grow something organically targeted towards boys and men without buying something over a billion dollars? And then see something like star wars run into the ground with cheap spinoffs? They are a bloated legacy company imo, anyone who buys into disney is destined to lose money on opportunity cost. Its the same price it was like 10 years ago lmao. Gaming IP and interactive worlds are the future, Disney has shown to be completely incompetent in that department . They fired game developers only for WB to snatch that talent up and have them create Hogwarts legacy, one of the best selling games that year.

mayorolivia

If it was that simple they’d be competing with Nvidia etc right now. They don’t have EUVs and access to other western tech and processes to be competitive. It’s very similar to the Soviet era when the Soviets were always stealing American semiconductor IP and yet were always 5 years behind.

breck

IP law is completely irrational and will go away someday. Downloading movies as simple files is so superior than streaming. That being said, the market can stay irrational for a long time. And Netflix could always pivot to a more honest business model (selling something real/atomic rather than IP ("Imaginary property"). I wouldn't short it, because of that last point, but I wouldn't be long Netflix, as without a pivot its success depends on the world remaining backwards regarding the human right to copy.

machyume

Instead of lawyering up and stopping people from generating their IP, maybe they should simply allow AI generations from companies for a price.

Interesting_Ghosts

I love Disney as a company. I love a lot of the things they’ve made over the last century. I am bearish on Disney in the long run. 1- Disney still sustains its entertainment business off ever shrinking TV and Box office money. Every year there is more and more content to compete against which devalues theirs. I do not believe streaming will ever be even 10% as profitable as TV and DVDs were. 2- Disney has a massive costly infrastructure that is hard to scale back on while keeping up the quality of its content. 3- the younger generation doesn’t care about Disney as much as the 30+ generations. In 20 years will anyone want to see another Star Wars spinoff or Toy Story 12? Does anyone under 30 even know what Mickey Mouse is other than a logo for the company? 4- Disney missed many opportunities to pivot their IP and power into other forms of entertainment like gaming. Disney could have been the American Nintendo if they had played it right.

VancouverSky

Because they have crappy and unconfident leadership? The same reason Netflix is so flaky with their content commitments? The fact is, if a show drives good ratings and subscriptions, any company will invest in making more of it, they monitor their meta data with an incredible amount of precision. Thats why we have 10? completely unnecessary Need for Speed movies, because that IP absolutely prints cash. This is hollywood 101. In an alternative universe where 1 million people opened up a new or renewed a fresh subscription and IMMEDIATELY turned on and watched the entirety of the Acolyte, Disney would pump out a second season to keep them around. But. That. Didnt. Happen. Instead it had a steep mid season viewership drop off. Because the show was expensive to produce slop. It's not that difficult to comprehend, regardless of my opinions of Disney's production quality. Bizarre that you think the opinions of X posts are driving Disney's lackluster ratings. Lol. That is mega cope and implies you think quite low of the average TV viewer. Like they can't judge a shows quality by themselves.

Open_Pollution_8038

I don’t like Apple because $20B of their profits come purely from its Google licensing deal. With google.com become less and less as a way the world searches for data, I can see Google telling Apple to kick rocks eventually and that’ll make Apple’s margins plummet since it’s pretty much free money. Apple has fallen massively behind, their device have no AI IP of their own and I can absolutely see a future where people don’t pay Apple a premium for devices that do less. Tim Cook sat on his ass for years and didn’t come up with any compelling products beyond earbuds and a watch. The core product sucks now.

dabirds1994

Eking out some earnings beats doesn’t overshadow some big problems. Its big IP is struggling. Where does its future growth come from?

Disastrous-Fun-2958

Exactly. Bagholder here … 3 issues: 1) Using expectations is rearward-looking, markets look forward and company forecasts are meh, 2) In a really hated sector (Commo), 3) Leadership has been lame since the end of the FIRST Iger tour and there is no decent successor in the succession plan. Oh yeah, Disney keeps making really bad movie choices that really pisses people off (remember the latest Snow White?). Forget about IP getting stale, they just continue to cannabalize their own brand.

kotsumu

Missed op honestly, they have so many princess IP to monetize

FloridianHeatDeath

To begin with, they don’t own Spider-Man. They split the profits of any Spider-Man movie. Even if they did own Spider-Man, you don’t sustain a company the size of Disney on one IP, no matter what that IP is.  Live actions have been hit or miss. Star Wars is so dead they’ve been afraid to release another mainstream movie for it.  Marvel has been almost consistently losing money or at best breaking even since Endgame. Iger saying their Ips are getting stale is one of the more competent things he’s said.

InquiringMind14

I sold my Disney stock a while back when cruise was highlighted as the growth engine - versus creating new content. The CEO was promoted within from park - so, strength is translate IP to customer experience. The issue is there are not really new IP. So, he can milk the cow for a few years with sustainable growth questionable at best. This is different from Apple (promoting Tim Cook). Apple was already the innovation leader - so innovation is less important than operation excellence. Disney issue is the opposite. They are already the operation leader - they need innovation.

Blahkbustuh

I was starting to think about Disney stock in the very late 10s then the pandemic happened. At the time Disney was like 1/3 parks, 1/3 cruises, and 1/3 media. I never got around to investing in them. (I'm currently 39, so I was a kid in the 90s when they had their renaissance and saw movies like Aladdin and on in theaters.) I don't know what they are up to or doing but think about it--traditional media and films haven't recovered and are in a time of great turmoil/change having been interrupted by streaming. Streaming is killing traditional TV and even movie theaters, and it's not extracting more revenue out of people than cable and movie tickets did. Also talking about TV Disney benefited hugely from cable TV and that's going away. They had the Disney Channel of course, but also ABC and ESPN. ESPN collected money from everyone with cable who had it in their cable package which included a lot of people who otherwise never watch sports. The parks are maxed out. They're already charging as much as they can for as many things as possible while cutting the whimsy and it seems like the company would have to build new parks in new locations to expand parks revenue at this point--like Texas or other warm places, somewhere in South America or the Middle East or Asia? I think there are Disneylands in China and Hong Kong but then that means China has them by the balls (and also China controls what movies are released in China) rather than them building it in Singapore or somewhere more normal/Western-business friendly. Cruises are meh. Is there a big untapped market of cruise-goers? Can you monetize a cruise more than they are currently? (I haven't ever been on a cruise and have no interest in them.) Also if we're going into a recession type environment, entertainment is a place people are going to decrease spending and Disney is an entertainment company. A big concern I have is when they bought the remains of Fox's media, Disney became like 80% or more of films in theaters. They can't release any films to theaters that don't cannibalize something else of theirs. If they released one children's film per month, it'd eat the tail of the previous one, for example. So they can't simply release more movies. Outside of the pandemic the last few years they've sort of lost their way. The old CEO, Iger, was the guy who bought IP rather than created it, like Pixar and Star Wars. Then the company tried to replace him with an accountant type and that sucked a lot of the charm out of the new attractions they've been building the last few years. Then people started talking big smack about the parks and how the fun and wonder is gone because basically the accountants took over. From what I've seen on the internet, Universal has done a bang-up job with Harry Potter Land down the road from Disney in Orlando while new Star Wars attractions have been mid. People hated Eisner for some reason but at least he let the creative people be creative. It seems like Disney can't figure out what it's supposed to be right now and it's trying to do too much and so not doing anything well.

Level_Counter3062

Surprising China isnt the #1 stock market. They steal all of our IP for free and mass produce everything barely paying people. You'd think they'd be worth hundreds of trillions like a 1980s villain or something