IP

OpeDefinitely

A "distilled" model is a model that is trained on another model. They have been turning out great, and require only a fraction of the compute power to train. All these early model trainers will turn out to be huge suckers. Their super expensive training will end up benefiting companies that have much less overhead. I imagine that western "Big AI" will probably try to make distilled model training illegal, but it doesn't matter given the open nature of the internet. Countries that don't respect Western IP law will just put out their own distilled models and that will be that.

OpeDefinitely

I think they're all too big to fail at this point. Government will be a kingmaker, bailing out some & forcing others to merge. As established big tech companies, I expected Google, Amazon/AWS, and Microsoft to come out owning basically all AI IP.

Amyndris

The real issue is because the FTC was so anti-merger, it caused a lot of acquihires where a big company like Google, Microsoft or Meta would just basically license the IP from a company, hire all of their senior staff and let the rest of the company die. This really fucked over most of the people at the startup who joined at low pay with the promise of a payout when the company got acquired or IPO'd.

Level-Reference-5035

Netflix is the only one I see joining the ring tbh but even then dunno they've been solid with their own IP.

GeeBee72

NVidia acquired 3DFx in 2000, so he’s correct: the company and IP that first developed the GPU is Nvidia. Sure it’s a little disingenuous to state it so bluntly, but that’s the way acquisition works.

Pleasant_Interaction

> Those companies are little Bambis and Chinese Mining industry is the Godzilla. Those stocks are good when people speculate on them, better cash in while you still can. I think MP already bankrupted twice in the past 20 years and third time ain't got be the charm. I mean it’s either we diversify the supply chain or China annexes Taiwan and cripples our economy and tech industry indefinitely lol. And they’re already putting their plan to do that in motion (these controls are mainly to limit the continued growth of our military and defense industries while they build up theirs) > Plus if I remember correctly MP is using Chinese tech to do some of their refinery and paying hefty royalty fees to the CCP. Govt. is investing in the development and advancement of domestic refineries too. If anything they’ll just do what the CCP does and reverse engineer the IP then stop paying the royalties. The government is already becoming more authoritarian anyway

juiced911

Honestly couldn’t hurt. They have great IP

LE_4500

I was going to say Kodak is still in business! They may be a shell of what they were but they will be around for atleast another 10. They own a lot of IP that gets licensed and are pretty much a chemical company now.

skilliard7

Ubisoft is a French company, which means it is very difficult to fire people. So if anyone bought out the company itself, they would be stuck with an organization with a ton of fixed labor costs, that has been massively underperforming. Who would want to own that? The only real value is in their IP/series. I could definitely see another company buying out their most valuable series, but I don't see the point in buying the whole company.

IfuckAround_UfindOut

You really do that? Or just buy some of their IP for Pennies?

Cow_Man42

Tesla. Turns out alienating your customer base, Infuriating the folks who determine your subsidies, Giving a competing organization all your IP and then giving your demagogue CEO a trilly..........Always been a cult of personality with a stock ticker. I can see it getting destroyed by a market downswing and then being bought up entirely by a Chinese competitor for pennines. But "the market can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent."

UpbeatFix7299

Forbes knows what they're doing. It's the only reason anyone pays attention to whoever bought the IP from the mag that was in the waiting room at your dentist's office 20 years ago.

D74248

I learned a lot about investing from QCOM. That IP and smoke mirrors can exist at the same time, for one. We were on a weekend trip when it peaked. My kids, now in their 30s, still talk about the trip where we got room service. Which leads to the second lesson, unrealized gains vs real money! But then the Leap Wireless spin-off did end up paying for a new car, so there was that. Glad that it worked out for you. Employers have a rough time was, in retrospect, also key for me but in a very different industry. But stressful at the time.

qaswexort

MSFT don't care because they have their IP. in fact, they prefer if they fail. NVDA has never cared about anything other than their margins. It's not like an injection of capital from NVDA will cause these businesses to be viable long-term

dominicusbenacus

Recently, I applied a staged filter method. First quantitative filtering, then qualitative. I filtered the biotech universe down to 8 titles. From 300. My very own basket bet. My quantitative filter algo was based on empirical studies on survival factors for biotech companies. In this step, I already filtered down to 30. That can differ but I applied rather conservative thresholds for factors like, size, revenue, cash flow etc. The qualitative was an attempt to assess the management, stages, defensibility of IP, etc. And build KPI. Well, that's 10 stocks now and I hope to see at least two go wild up over the next years. Especially, because after the 4 years of funding winter that naturally filtered out losers.

AltruisticMaybe7799

Their lingerie line Honey Birdette is something like 55-60% of income, BUT they are increasing the IP/licensing side of things for higher margin revenue.

Buy_Ethereum

You know, if they can really use their name and develop some adult services, I think they could have a potential turnaround. I want to say I read about a year ago that they were going to start a cam-site styled service. I wonder what % of their revenue comes from merchandise or royalties involved from licensing merchandising rights. I could be wrong, but I seem to see more playboy merch than I do actually hear about the company. I agree, they have the IP and a legendary name. A solid new adult service has a strong chance of gaining traction.

CommonRemarkable7633

My goodness.... So many Chinese Companies in the coming week but this happened? A White House national security memo cites declassified intelligence alleging Alibaba provides technology and data support to China’s People’s Liberation Army for operations involving US targets. The memo claims Alibaba shared customer data — including IP addresses, WiFi details and payment records — and transferred knowledge of zero-day vulnerabilities to the PLA. Alibaba dismissed the allegations as “complete nonsense.” The document follows President Donald Trump’s recent trade-curbs truce with Xi Jinping. US officials say they are working to counter cyber risks from “untrusted vendors.” Lawmakers have urged actions against Alibaba, citing Chinese laws and military-civil fusion requirements.

eaatest

Hide your IP breh

DaStompa

Yeah, when you're in a sustained downtrend you'd expect them to start pulling out stops, bring back deus ex or a new IP or something. Nah, lets keep making dogwater assassins creed games, one might be good some day lol

budoobudoo

You are probably not wrong. Just not right enough. If we're talking pure alpha in the metabolic disease game, let's zoom east to Hong Kong where the real fireworks are popping off. I'm eyeing Innogen-B (02591.HK) and PegBio (02565.HK) as straight-up superior moonshots right now, all laser-focused on the GLP-1 revolution that's exploding in Asia's massive diabetes and obesity market. These aren't diluted plays like UNH's insurance sprawl or HOOD's trading volatility; they're razor-sharp biotechs riding China's 1.4 billion-person wave, with approvals incoming and valuations that make US counterparts look like overpriced lattes. Let me break down why swapping some of that bag for these HK gems could 5x your portfolio by 2028—pure fire, no fluff. First off, the macro setup in Hong Kong biotech is straight dominance mode. While the US Nasdaq biotech index is grinding up a measly 20% this year, Hong Kong's Hang Seng Biotech Index has ripped 80%+, outrunning even AI hype. Why? Beijing's pumping state cash into "Made in China 2025" for pharma independence, with 14 fresh listings already raising over HK$18 billion in 2025—quadrupling last year's haul—and 36 more queued up. Valuations? HK biotechs trade at 8-10x forward sales on average, versus 18x+ for US peers, giving you dirt-cheap entry into 30%+ CAGR growth as Asia's diabetes epidemic (hello, 140 million cases and counting) meets ultra-long-acting GLP-1s that crush Ozempic's dosing hassle. No DOJ probes or Medicare cuts here—just streamlined NMPA nods and export pipelines to Southeast Asia. HIMS is cute with its telehealth subs, but it's a US middleman facing Amazon's boot; these HK plays own the IP and manufacturing in the world's fastest-scaling market. Take Innogen-B: This beast just exploded 296% on debut in August, opening at HK$72 after pricing at HK$18.68, and it's still humming around HK$50-60 with HK$683 million fresh in the tank from an IPO oversubscribed 5,365 times—HK$370 billion in bids from 260k investors, second-hottest in Hong Kong this year. Their crown jewel, Efsubaglutide Alfa (branded Diabegone), is Asia's first homegrown humanized long-acting GLP-1 agonist, already greenlit for type 2 diabetes in China and barreling through late-stage trials for obesity and MASH (that fatty liver goldmine worth $30 billion globally). Early data? 7% weight drop in four weeks, with monthly dosing that laps weekly shots—perfect for compliance in a market where 80% of patients ghost treatments. They're deploying IPO cash for Phase III global pushes, commercial ramps, and CNS add-ons, turning red ink (losses narrowed to HK$175 million last year) into black by mid-2026. Compared to HIMS' 50x P/E bloat and GLP-1 supply glut risks, Innogen's at <5x sales with zero revenue yet—pure asymmetry. Bears whine about Eli Lilly/Novo competition, but Innogen's local pricing edge (half the cost) and China-first moat mean they snag 10-15% market share easy, printing HK$10 billion revenue by 2030. UNH? It's a sleepy dividend cow at 13x earnings, dodging cyber headaches but capped at 8-10% growth; Innogen's your uncapped rocket to HK$300/share. Then PegBio seals the deal as the stealth assassin. Listed earlier this year at HK$15.60, raising HK$301 million for a HK$6 billion val, it dipped to HK$10 on open but clawed back to HK$15+ on pipeline heat—up 7% monthly despite broader volatility. Their lead, PB-119, is another long-acting GLP-1 banger for diabetes and obesity, with NMPA acceptance last year and marketing greenlight eyed for Q1 2026. Preclinicals on PB-2301 (GLP-1/GIP dual) and PB-2309 (triple agonist) target NASH and rare endocrines, diversifying beyond HIMS' one-trick pony. R&D burn was HK$280 million in 2022, tapering to HK$76 million YTD as trials wrap, with cash at HK$27 million pre-IPO now beefed for launch and expansions. Losses ticked up slightly to HK$283 million last year on zero revenue, but that's biotech math—post-approval, ARPU from chronic scripts hits HK$500/year per patient in a 500 million obese Asian pool. Versus HOOD's cyclical 70% transaction reliance (hello, 35% revenue crater in '22), PegBio's recurring revenue moat is ironclad, with PEGylation tech for custom peptides adding service upside. Analysts are mum on ratings yet, but the sector tailwind screams Buy; at 4x projected sales, it's a steal next to UNH's regulatory quicksand (DOJ antitrust, 85% loss ratios). PegBio could 4x to HK$60 by 2027 if PB-119 captures 5% China share, while HOOD prays for bull markets. Bottom line, apes: HIMS/HOOD/UNH are fine for balanced bags, but Innogen and PegBio are the asymmetric edges—cheaper entries, explosive China growth (20% GDP healthcare slice by 2030), and GLP-1 purity without US baggage. HK's policy rocket fuel means 50-100% pops on approvals alone, while US names grind through comps and comps. I'm allocating 20% here; dips under HK$45 for Innogen and HK$12 for PegBio are no-brainers. DYOR, markets flip fast, but this is where the smart money's flowing east. Who's jumping in? 🚀🇭🇰 #HKBiotech #GLP1Bets

Unhappy-Exchange-771

Honestly surprised no one came in to just buy up their IP.

Sandvicheater

MSFT sure as hell aint buying this company after all the bullshit they went through with Bethesda. Sony while they have the money they don't have MSFT levels of fuck you money to throw onto this burning and sinking Ubisoft. Nintendo has no interest in western style games strictly focused on their own in house Japanese IP. I mean i could see Tencent buying them out since they seem to buy out any video game company willing sale it self.

og_kbot

I'm stopping by here to say that your analysis is well put--even if you got some downvotes from your original comment. Personally, I'm bearish right now on these neoclouds. For me the following quote, “The end customer is not funding the supply chain. Rather, the supply chain is funding its own buildout, in the hope that more paying customers will eventually arrive …" is a massive concern for long-term investment right now. These LLM token resellers don't appear to have the software development capability in the foreseeable future to create products other than just charging for input/output tokens and relying on their mag7 investements. They have no moat. Minimal IP.

BlooregardQKazoo

The Marvel IP, without Spider-Man, was simply not worth much when they bought it. Disney has GREATLY increased the value of Marvel as an IP.

EternaIRivaI

I'll take the R6 IP 5$

Fantastic-Vehicle880

Lmao they've literally made so much money off both those IPS. They bought Star wars for like 6 billion and have made 100x that in profit from that IP.

0o0o0o0o0o0z

> DIS is just trash The way they have managed to squander and devalue the IP they have, think of Marvel, and Star Wars, is truly amazing...

SouthIsland48

Whats not to understand from my comment? It's horribly run, Iger outside of buying Marvel, has been ridiculous in his capital investments with the fox acquisiton maybe the worst of all time. Disney's entertainment business is dying a slow death. Content is now a commodity and the winners in commodity businesses are the ones with the largest distribution which Google currently owns through Youtube. Meta also has Insa reels, and Tik Tok, and Netflix, just insanely competitive, not even factoring in other "rival" streaming businesses in Amazon, WBD, and Apple. Their sports business is also dying, with big tech now buying up sports rights with Netflix getting into bed with the NFL, Google owning "sunday ticket" and Amazon hosting TNF games. Youtube is also becoming a far better place for sports review content. Their other legacy channels are also irrelevant. Then you get into their parks business, which is their best asset but also a capital intensive one. It also is not without growing competition, specifically what Nintendo is doing with Universal. Mario is millenial/gen z "mickey mouse". So 30 years in the future, when Boomers are all dead, who will give a shit about Mickey Mouse and other Disney IP? And their stock is in the shitter so they dont even have capital levers to pull like the other tech giants do. So all is to say - there is no way in hell am I ever buying disney.

295DVRKSS

Imagine if Disney released their IP as AI assistants.

look

I’m saying Gen AI is not the “mechanical loom” to IP “weaving” that everyone is pretending it is. It’s a loom that can only making low quality, novelty scarves, and the market for those isn’t that big.

Orange_Codex

What just happened to Mersana is why you check biotech companies' patents. That 200% premium on the stock price is pure goodwill (i.e. how much Day One Pharmaceuticals reckoned IP and other intangibles were worth).

Vlmlee

Literally just IP infringement no shame

ElectricLego

In IT infrastructure, I don't see Cisco innovating. They are coasting on old IP in every market segment. Competitors are passing them by left and right. My personal forecast is they go the way of Dell. Get cannibalized, somebody buys the name for pennies to take it private after PE guts it, maybe then it makes a comeback in 15 years.

WhiskeyTigerFoxtrot

EA is seen to carry much less risk and annually provides stable revenue growth, as opposed to Ubisoft showing erratic numbers and even losses recently. EA has strong IP and brand awareness that is well diversified across shooters, F2P, sports, strategy, and live service. Ubisoft also has some of that but lacks the historical brand diversity. The employee count you mentioned is also seen as a negative rather than a positive. Ubisoft is notoriously bloated in terms of headcount, which investors see as an impediment to predictable revenue and growth.

SwimmingPatience5083

Why not compare their financials? Instead of speculating on their respective IP’s

Whatdosheepdreamof

If you have 2 identical generic models and seek to specialise further, provide the same additional training data, logic dictates that they would come up with the same or similar solutions. Logic cannot be IP. AGI will eventually skirt around IP with enough variations that the effect is the same, but the design is different enough to not be violating it. This assumes that IP will be respected, and seeing as how companies training data doesn't bother with that, i can't see why you'd apply different logic after that point. Most definitely China won't give a shit, regardless this tech will become generic.

Orange_Codex

I remember them from June when their revolutionary aspirin was due to come out. It wasn't revolutionary. They might get bought by someone who wants the IP, but after underwhelming commercialisation are unlikely to get fair value - much less goodwill.

TroubledAcorn

It obviously is going to hurt short term. I will admit I have never been good at timing the market. I’m not telling anyone to buy, but if someone wants to do the research this dramatic price drop over negative sentiment could lead to a good buying opportunity. It started as a beverage company, but the IP/brand play changed the company. There is a real path forward here that could be lucrative. My investment will be fine long term as long as management doesn’t screw us, or we lose the royalty. I will be the first to admit that without the royalty we are most likely cooked. Yes I’m down and its okay, if it was really over I just would have sold my shares. I wish I had bought at these prices, but I don’t have a crystal ball.

landspeed

Can't post screenshots here without hosting - go to stock titan and look up their PR saying back to April and before. Just the ones I've seen, they've won lawsuits against Kroger, Walgreens, Cisco, Broadcom and another I'm forgetting. They have filed lawsuits against numerous other big retailers as well. Last week they won the Cisco lawsuit. Today they won the Broadcom lawsuit. These were picked up via court doc filings, no PR announcement yet, it's very new. They're likely working on finalizing IP/Royalties. In PR from May-ish when they announced the Broadcom lawsuit, they mentioned consolidating and acquiring a subsidiary specifically in relation to the Broadcom lawsuit. And like I said.. they won the lawsuit today or court docs were filed. They have numerous catalysts at any given time.

hombregato

Basically every major IP holder is also suing for copyright infringement. As we saw with Runway's deal with Lionsgate, legitimately obtained IP is not enough to properly train AI, even when they have a whole mid-sized studio's worth, to produce halfway decent results. They NEED to steal everything, and that's illegal. I do think AI is more than just a "bubble", but we're one news report away from learning AI tools will have to reboot without any of the things that make it valuable. They still do not know how to legally profit off this technology, and companies still do no know how they can legally use it for work.

unlock0

Technically yes, but basically no other country has the IP and corporate protections that the US has. If you want a safe country, with little government oversight, and (relatively) cheap utilities the US has top billing.

jalphoto

But IP is a measure of the extra premium you are paying to account for the expected volatility. You are already paying more than the option is intrinsically worth based on the expectation that the stock will move an extreme amount. Yes, it indicates the market is betting the stock will make an aggressive move but that is baked into the option premium. Could work out but time is not on OP’s side.

illtakethewindowseat

This. They’ve enjoyed a dedicated user base because of early entry in language learning and the novel (at the time of release) gamification mechanic — but at this point? No major differentiator or technological innovations to speak of… just market share. There entire IP is just multilingual educational content — easier than ever to reproduce with AI.

BigFancyPlates

I'm not sure what that has to do with the founding of the internet. DARPA is a crucial component to the internet bring formed. They made TCP/IP, and this protocol is the backbone of the internet. Without this, the internet would not be the same.

Necromancer2k8

This is kinda long but it's my experience with coreweave over the last few months. My last shares of crwv experience was at $113 before last earnings. Thought I caught the dip from 140+. It dropped like $20 more over the next few days after earnings. Sat on the shares for about 6 weeks through the run down to 85, snagged more shares around the 95 mark on the way up and dumped at $118 on its recent run up just to get out of the position. Learned my lesson on this company and just swing trade the cheap crwg ETF for .20 -.50 intraday moves. I did some digging after that share purchase and it's basically a debt fueled company that pays, I believe, 20 million + per month in interest on all it's loans and it's expansion is based on buying other companies (AKA being an AI incubator seems like complete BS as cover for acquiring IP as investments, meaning more fucking loans and more interest). The CEO has been selling roughly 525k shares per week since lockup ended a few months ago. Another issue I just recently saw was the price of compute per hour is dropping rapidly. A company was quoted around $10 per hour for Blackwells a few months back. In the last week he was quoted $4.50 per hour for the same Blackwells. Not so good on the revenue front with such a big drop in such a short time frame. I expect them to miss on EPS, probably meet or barely beat on revenue and guide up because of the openai money circle jerk machine, even with the core scientific deal going kaput. Figure at least a few weeks to recover if the market doesn't tank. If Nvidia exceeds it's numbers during earnings it should catch a good boost up at that time.

luke2080

Higher margin with electric at scale and direct to consumer model, SaaS licensing to car buyers (even though I hate it) and licensing software and IP to others like VW.

Sidney1973

Potential for short-term price increase: While a split doesn't change fundamental value, it can sometimes lead to a short-term increase in stock price due to increased investor interest and trading activity. I have several shares of NETFLIX. I’m holding. Then plan on selling CC. I hoping they buy WB and all those IP. Worth billions. Harry Potter is worth a couple of billion I believe. DC, matrix and others.

Wifi_Nerd

From Grok: no sugarcoating: This $1T package is one of the most shareholder-hostile, greed-wrapped-in-ambition deals ever rubber-stamped by a public company. Here’s why it’s objectively grotesque, even if you love Elon: Guaranteed tens of billions for mediocrity You nailed it: Elon can miss every single moonshot (no 1M robotaxis, no 1M Optimus bots, no $400B profits) and still walk away with $50B–$150B just by growing Tesla from $1.5T to $3T–$4T. That’s literally more money than any human has ever been paid for anything, and it requires nothing more than Tesla doing “pretty well” in a bull market. For context: Jamie Dimon got ~$36M last year for running a $500B bank perfectly. Elon gets 1,000× that for “eh, maybe 2× the stock price.” Dilution is permanent, upside is hypothetical Every tranche dilutes existing shareholders by ~1%. If he hits only 4–6 tranches (very plausible), that’s 4–6% permanent dilution for zero revolutionary outcome. Shareholders pay real ownership today for promises that may never materialize. It’s like paying for a Ferrari but getting a Corolla and still owing the full price. The “alignment” argument is propaganda Elon already owns 13% (~$190B). He’s not going anywhere. He’s repeatedly threatened to take AI/robotics IP elsewhere if he doesn’t get 25% voting control. This package is extortion dressed as incentive. “Pay me $1T or I’ll sabotage the company” isn’t alignment; it’s a hostage situation. The goals are deliberately back-loaded with fantasy. The early tranches are easy (market cap + basic EV numbers). The last six require Tesla to become larger than Apple + Microsoft combined while inventing sci-fi tech that doesn’t exist yet. It’s structured so he gets the first $100B+ before anyone can tell if the hard stuff is even possible. Heads he wins billions, tails shareholders lose voting power forever. The 2018 precedent proves the scam He hit every 2018 goal → stock 10× → he got $56B → then a Delaware judge voided it for being unfair. Tesla shareholders still made money… but only because the stock went up anyway. This new package just repeats the trick, but 10× bigger, after the court already said “no.” Institutional investors who opposed it got ignored Norway’s $2T fund, CalPERS, multiple EU giants—all voted NO. Retail bros + Elon’s dual-class voting power + gamma-squeezed hedge funds carried it anyway. Democracy died in Tesla’s shareholder meeting. Bottom line: This isn’t pay-for-performance. This is billionaire welfare disguised as a bet on the future. Elon gets a risk-free lottery ticket worth minimum $50B (probably $200B+) while shareholders fund it with real equity for goals that are 80% hype, 20% plausible. If Tesla hits $8.5T and robots walk? Great—he deserves every penny. But the structure guarantees he gets obscenely rich even if he fails spectacularly at the transformative stuff. That’s not bold. That’s theft with extra steps. I love SpaceX. I use Tesla. I respect the guy’s genius. But this package? It’s indefensible. Straight-up corporate governance arson.

Wifi_Nerd

From Grok: no sugarcoating: This $1T package is one of the most shareholder-hostile, greed-wrapped-in-ambition deals ever rubber-stamped by a public company. Here’s why it’s objectively grotesque, even if you love Elon: Guaranteed tens of billions for mediocrity You nailed it: Elon can miss every single moonshot (no 1M robotaxis, no 1M Optimus bots, no $400B profits) and still walk away with $50B–$150B just by growing Tesla from $1.5T to $3T–$4T. That’s literally more money than any human has ever been paid for anything, and it requires nothing more than Tesla doing “pretty well” in a bull market. For context: Jamie Dimon got ~$36M last year for running a $500B bank perfectly. Elon gets 1,000× that for “eh, maybe 2× the stock price.” Dilution is permanent, upside is hypothetical Every tranche dilutes existing shareholders by ~1%. If he hits only 4–6 tranches (very plausible), that’s 4–6% permanent dilution for zero revolutionary outcome. Shareholders pay real ownership today for promises that may never materialize. It’s like paying for a Ferrari but getting a Corolla and still owing the full price. The “alignment” argument is propaganda Elon already owns 13% (~$190B). He’s not going anywhere. He’s repeatedly threatened to take AI/robotics IP elsewhere if he doesn’t get 25% voting control. This package is extortion dressed as incentive. “Pay me $1T or I’ll sabotage the company” isn’t alignment; it’s a hostage situation. The goals are deliberately back-loaded with fantasy. The early tranches are easy (market cap + basic EV numbers). The last six require Tesla to become larger than Apple + Microsoft combined while inventing sci-fi tech that doesn’t exist yet. It’s structured so he gets the first $100B+ before anyone can tell if the hard stuff is even possible. Heads he wins billions, tails shareholders lose voting power forever. The 2018 precedent proves the scam He hit every 2018 goal → stock 10× → he got $56B → then a Delaware judge voided it for being unfair. Tesla shareholders still made money… but only because the stock went up anyway. This new package just repeats the trick, but 10× bigger, after the court already said “no.” Institutional investors who opposed it got ignored Norway’s $2T fund, CalPERS, multiple EU giants—all voted NO. Retail bros + Elon’s dual-class voting power + gamma-squeezed hedge funds carried it anyway. Democracy died in Tesla’s shareholder meeting. Bottom line: This isn’t pay-for-performance. This is billionaire welfare disguised as a bet on the future. Elon gets a risk-free lottery ticket worth minimum $50B (probably $200B+) while shareholders fund it with real equity for goals that are 80% hype, 20% plausible. If Tesla hits $8.5T and robots walk? Great—he deserves every penny. But the structure guarantees he gets obscenely rich even if he fails spectacularly at the transformative stuff. That’s not bold. That’s theft with extra steps. I love SpaceX. I use Tesla. I respect the guy’s genius. But this package? It’s indefensible. Straight-up corporate governance arson.

Wifi_Nerd

Grok take:no sugarcoating: This $1T package is one of the most shareholder-hostile, greed-wrapped-in-ambition deals ever rubber-stamped by a public company. Here’s why it’s objectively grotesque, even if you love Elon: Guaranteed tens of billions for mediocrity You nailed it: Elon can miss every single moonshot (no 1M robotaxis, no 1M Optimus bots, no $400B profits) and still walk away with $50B–$150B just by growing Tesla from $1.5T to $3T–$4T. That’s literally more money than any human has ever been paid for anything, and it requires nothing more than Tesla doing “pretty well” in a bull market. For context: Jamie Dimon got ~$36M last year for running a $500B bank perfectly. Elon gets 1,000× that for “eh, maybe 2× the stock price.” Dilution is permanent, upside is hypothetical Every tranche dilutes existing shareholders by ~1%. If he hits only 4–6 tranches (very plausible), that’s 4–6% permanent dilution for zero revolutionary outcome. Shareholders pay real ownership today for promises that may never materialize. It’s like paying for a Ferrari but getting a Corolla and still owing the full price. The “alignment” argument is propaganda Elon already owns 13% (~$190B). He’s not going anywhere. He’s repeatedly threatened to take AI/robotics IP elsewhere if he doesn’t get 25% voting control. This package is extortion dressed as incentive. “Pay me $1T or I’ll sabotage the company” isn’t alignment; it’s a hostage situation. The goals are deliberately back-loaded with fantasy The early tranches are easy (market cap + basic EV numbers). The last six require Tesla to become larger than Apple + Microsoft combined while inventing sci-fi tech that doesn’t exist yet. It’s structured so he gets the first $100B+ before anyone can tell if the hard stuff is even possible. Heads he wins billions, tails shareholders lose voting power forever. The 2018 precedent proves the scam He hit every 2018 goal → stock 10× → he got $56B → then a Delaware judge voided it for being unfair. Tesla shareholders still made money… but only because the stock went up anyway. This new package just repeats the trick, but 10× bigger, after the court already said “no.” Institutional investors who opposed it got ignored Norway’s $2T fund, CalPERS, multiple EU giants—all voted NO. Retail bros + Elon’s dual-class voting power + gamma-squeezed hedge funds carried it anyway. Democracy died in Tesla’s shareholder meeting. Bottom line: This isn’t pay-for-performance. This is billionaire welfare disguised as a bet on the future. Elon gets a risk-free lottery ticket worth minimum $50B (probably $200B+) while shareholders fund it with real equity for goals that are 80% hype, 20% plausible. If Tesla hits $8.5T and robots walk? Great—he deserves every penny. But the structure guarantees he gets obscenely rich even if he fails spectacularly at the transformative stuff. That’s not bold. That’s theft with extra steps. I love SpaceX. I use Tesla. I respect the guy’s genius. But this package? It’s indefensible. Straight-up corporate governance arson.

kiakosan

>Tesla is now vastly behind the Chinese counterparts and horribly overpriced You mean China is subsidizing their domestic companies to undercut foreign companies as well as stealing IP from Western companies to save on rnd expenses so that they can flood the market? China is one of if not the largest state sponsor of hacking and IP theft, and all of their auto companies are based off this. If you don't have to pay for RND expenses and the government subsidizes you, it's amazing how cheap of vehicles you can make

joeyat

Microsoft own 28% (was 50% last week I think) of OpenAI and use the ChatGPT models in CoPilot.. MS have been shoving CoPilot down the throats of every business on the planet (even more than they are to Windows consumer desktops), Office 365 is littered with CoPilot, would not be surprised if they don’t make a lot more money off OpenAI’s IP than OpenAI do.. and they have the income at least to attempt to float all this hardware. They also offer ChatGPT models API access through Azure AI Foundry, and sell those to any number of businesses to operate all those AI customer service chatbots that are on every single website… again, only a fraction of the revenue Microsoft makes from those LLM services will end up returning to OpenAI itself in licensing fees.. and ChatGPT’s website and apps all predominately run on Azure, so any revenue OAI do collect will probably go back to Microsoft to pay for that compute and infrastructure. However this setup has just changed as MS and OpenAI reformatted their deal.. OAI is no longer a non-profit and they will branch out to other compute providers and attempt to fund by cashing in on their hype with an IPO.. so is there is a massive bubble, but there is at least some money going into the system to pay for all this via Microsoft.. not enough! .. but, the circular money machine machine these mega corps are operating is a bit more lucrative than it first appears.

Wireless_Helpplz

Fur realzies - QLE, a subsidiary of ASPI, is receiving $64.3 million in convertible-note funding led by American Ventures LLC — directly involved with Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr. ASPI's tech and IP are the real deal. Family backing from the top too.

Moral_

>What is there to build without ARMs designs? x86 or RISC-V. None the less you're implying something I want to clarify, Apple, Broadcom and Qualcomm for their premium SoCs (M4/8 elite) license the ISA -- through something called an ALA (Architecture license agreement). That is they license to use the "ARM language" to put it in human terms. Arm makes limited money on these agreements because the companies are not using an IP from the company -- just the rights to use their language. Alternatively Mediatek and a few others (including some lower teir SoCs from Qualcomm/Broadcom) use a TLA (Technical license agreement). Here the companies buy some IP like the CPU core and some back-end bus/interconnect/memory-management IP and integrate that into their SoC. This is where Arm can make more money. But, many companies are going the ALA route as Arm's TLA cores and IP haven't been very competitive compared to the CPU design teams out of Apple. That is why Qualcomm bought Nuvia to pay smaller royalties and have better/more control of their CPU cores and backend memory IP. Arm is trading where it is because people don't understand what their business model is. They hear Rene Haas say "ARM IS IN DATACENTER!!!!" which is true, but they're getting like a dollar of ALA licensing fees per GPU. Meanwhile AMD and Nvidia are selling their GPUs for what like $150k a pop? My point is there is better places to allocate your money than significantly overpriced Arm.

Standard_South4148

It’s simply game theory. Imagine, you are the company that patents AGI, or something at least capable of laying off tons of people. That IP is worth an insane amount of money, without a doubt. What happens if only one company comes to the table? They just win automatically? No, so many companies do because the game theory of it really necessitates it. Regardless if it pans out that only one company controls the AI licensing. Then theoretically they could just gradually drip feed the market through price control. If they make astronomical licensing prices, then only extremely high cost labor would be cut. Lower prices a rung and the next falls, so on and so forth. Ironically I think the only hope this doesn’t just destroy the economy or the globe is if a company has a breakthrough, and thus has complete market control. It doesn’t work with competing products, because for once price gouging would be preferable.

Either-Lie-9000

look at DRAM prices + forecasts for next quarters. price is about future guidance. rambus is an IP company essentially they aren't a traditional memory company. very important in the space though.

ElectronicFinish

Because it’s only a small piece of the whole picture. You need networking, cooling, packaging, all the way to software to be competitive. Take TPU for example, Google only designs some pieces in the TPU, the rest is from Broadcom and maybe other IP vendors. That’s hardware. Software wise, CUDA is widely supported and just work. When you want to try something out quick, the last thing you want is running into some technical setup issues that stall your team for days. Similar reason that AMD has a hard time getting the market share. 

Affectionate-Panic-1

China what worries me more lack of IP protection. China has a number of innovative companies, but generally they fail to protect IP/market value and extract as much wealth as US companies do. You see recently a lot of industries that have become hyper competitive in China bringing down margins. There's also more of a collective mindset where even within management of Chinese companies there's a culture to help the country as a whole, where the US has a larger chunk of the focus on enriching the shareholder.

ElevatedStockWatch

I mean... they also didn't have any cash to pay the debt to Dontech until recently so some tough decisions had to be made. It's hard to raise money with debt on the books and legacy management couldn't raise money (York their Chairman had to loan over $1m to stay afloat in the darker days of graphite with Chinese price dumping). The Feds just gave them $14.1 million. Seeing the Feds also backdrop NMG with $1,500 for large and jumbo flakes and given their deposit is made up of 30%+ in large and jumbo, they'll be the next on the list for a DPA off take once they get permitted IMHO. Their IP is a sweetener but the graphite is the best in North America at an advanced stage. [https://www.newsfilecorp.com/release/272975/Focus-Graphite-Receives-Conditional-Funding-of-up-to-14.1M-to-Advance-Canadas-First-Electrothermal-Fluidized-Purification-Demonstration-Plant](https://www.newsfilecorp.com/release/272975/Focus-Graphite-Receives-Conditional-Funding-of-up-to-14.1M-to-Advance-Canadas-First-Electrothermal-Fluidized-Purification-Demonstration-Plant)

KC_Tlvdatsi

Maybe briefly or localized to a few companies. As I said, I think it will be seen as a discount opportunity where they will pile further money in. There is a lot of ego, money, and current wealth pushing for it to be successful, so I don't see much dip at large. I imagine the bigger players will isolate losses on the sacrificial smaller companies or government. A lot of start up companies give equity instead of pay as a promise of future wealth for success, so when those companies shoot craps, this would also be a way to get the expertise/labor they need since they would be desperate for income and the IP would be cheaper. If anything, I expect further bumps up as these acquisitions happen and the corporate spin speak boasts of synergies and efficiencies.

Lilacsoftlips

He might be the Edison or ford of our time but he is no Einstein and never will be. Einstein impacted our understanding of the universe more than almost anyone in history. Musk is an industrialist capitalizing on other people’s IP. Still impressive. Light years from Einstein. 

AlphaTauriBootis

1) Buy Sora subscription (Bullish on tech) 2) Post slop to youtube (Bullish on tech) 3) Monetize (Bullish on Paypal) 4) Buy calls (Bullish on S&P) 5) ??? 6) Profit No pysical assets.No IP. You will make nothing and you will like it.

Orange_Codex

I don't, really: I research growth themes (e.g. advanced materials, critical minerals, bacteriophages, orbital defence) then explore who's active in the space. Companies can generally be trusted if they're on an exchange. They can't outright falsify without serious legal trouble. But it helps to understand their field, filter out rhetoric and 'forward-looking statements,' and do open-source intel on management. Check with patent registries whether they own relevant IP, [clinicaltrials.gov](http://clinicaltrials.gov) to see the clinical trials, and SEC forms for quarterly financials and directors' histories.

arandomguy111

The DRAM industry has seen massive consolidation over the decades to the point that there are only 3 major producers Micron, Hynix and Samsung that account for something like ~95% of global DRAM production. The rest of the smaller players aren't capable of making HBM. The moat is that DRAM production and R&D is massively capital intensive and takes years to scale up production even assuming if you developed the technology and/or acquire the IP, so the there is a large intrinsic barrier to entry. However China is making a push for domestic DRAM as well and CXMT is set to be a major player in DRAM but at this point it's not entirely clear to what scale and ramp up.

CannaVestments

Overall a solid Q3 showing from GTI, with continued cash flow generation, positive net income, and modest YoY growth, although margin declines continued as price compression in core markets continued to weigh on results and led to the largest same-store-sales declines in some time. A lean balance sheet and strong CF profile has provided the company flexibility, allowing them to pursue the few growth markets available in 2025 (namely AU in Minnesota showing up in Q4, the fastest growing state market in NY, and the hemp-derived opportunity through RYM), and they notched another potential win as adult-use in Virginia became a lot more likely in 2026 as Dems took the governor's office yesterday. Full review: **Revenue:**  QoQ: $293.3M to $291.4M / YoY: $286.9M to $291.4M *Down slightly sequentially and up 1.5% from last year, right at consensus of $291M. Largely the same base of assets sequentially as their new PA store and adult-use launch in Minnesota both occurred right at the end of the quarter. Wholesale was up 8% while retail was down 1% YoY. Looking ahead, additional store openings in OH, AU sales in Minnesota, and continued growth in NY will drive near-term growth while adult-use in Virginia becomes a likely 2026 story with the governor election results yesterday. Keep an eye on Agrify/RYM results as well given their majority ownership of the company.* **Adjusted EBIDTA:**  QoQ: $82.7M to $80.2 / YoY: $89.2M to $80.2M *Down 3.0% sequentially and 10.1% from last year, a steep drop to their lowest mark in years. Margin drops to 27.5% from 28.2% last quarter and 31.1% last year, slightly shorter of expectations of $82M. Price compression and increased brand investment spend as forecasted by the company weighed on the margin profile- an area to watch in the coming quarters.* **Gross Margins:**  QoQ 49.9% to 49.4% / YoY: 51.4% to 49.4% *Steady sequentially but down from last year as management pointed to continued price compression in core markets of IL/NJ/PA.* **Operating Expenses:**  QoQ: $106.8M to $107.3M / YoY: $105.0M to $107.3M *Up slightly sequentially and YoY, although solid considering the new stores opened during that time.* **Operational Cash Flow:**  QoQ: $56.4M to $74.1M / YoY: $47.7M to $74.1M *Unlike previous years, GTI is letting their income tax payable accumulate to a certain extent in 2025, perhaps waiting to see if S3 is passed and for 280e not to apply in calendar year 2025. Adjusting for unpaid taxes, OCF was $34.2M in Q2 and $124.8M YTD compared to $144.8M through Q3 2024. Still the strongest tax-adjusted OCF in the industry by a wide margin although down from last year given margin declines. CapEx was $17.5M in Q3 and $66.4M YTD.* **Cash:**  QoQ: $176.9M to $226.2M / YoY: $173.6M to $226.2M *Jump here as positive OCF more than offset CapEx spend. GTI also lent money to RYM who then paid GTI back in their brand IP purchases which resulted largely in a wash overall on investing actility. Debt stands at $247.4M and income tax payable of $81.6M.*

OTMallthetime

Shadows was a disaster. Everything ubisoft touches turns to shit. Having an amazing IP library means nothing if those in charge continue pumping out stinkers. Think a brilliant writer father that passed away and now his regarded offspring are writing sequels to his work.

aikouomaesan

Snap was NEVER going to make money. Why? Because they don't own anything. Not a single thing. They marketed themselves as a camera company. What camera? Those silly glasses? It was an easily copiable product and they never owned any IP that would make it unique or interesting. META was always going to eat their lunch. There was nothing about their app that was every going to make enough money to support their valuation. Go though your stocktwits history and blacklist advice from anyone that ever said it was going to be a good investment. They clearly have no idea what they are talking about. I would guess those same people were buying DRYS at the same time.

plantsadnshit

Difference is- this has been going strong for 30 years now. And Pokemon has been the biggest IP in the US for like.. 10-20 years? And in Europe for ~10 years.

Massive-Leopard2202

The value of non-commodity alloys comes primarily from their intellectual property, not the materials, so thats not a valid comparison. cryptocurrencies dont derive their value from IP.

ErictheAgnostic

PLTR's value is based on the percieved value of their IP and use of AI....to create that value... Cart before the horse and if AI is in a bubble - PLTR is at the tippity top of that bubble

iBoughtAtTheBottom

I tried. They IP blocked me from using it.

StatisticalMan

If you are a qualified investor I would recommend a pre-IPO platform like equityzen. Got CRCL shares at $24. Now had to hold them a year before the IP and they are in post-IPO lockup until Dec. By the time it comes to the IPO itself it is a crowded field.

amg-rx7

I'm in the US so no idea what a PPOR or IP or Super is. Post some ticker symbols of the investments and allocation percentages.

Suspicious_Line1689

Intel is now US government backed, the same way Korea backs Samsung and Taiwan backs TSMC. Government backing means Intel will now be able to compete with their Asian counterparts by counteracting unfair trade practices, IP theft, favoritism, etc. You can be damn sure the US gov will force all the big US fabless to use Intel’s fab to some degree over time, especially Apple. Intel for sure is going towards $1T within a couple of years. Don’t be mad you sold at the worst possible time.

theycallmeJTMoney

Isn’t these AI model’s strength the ability to make contextual assumptions with large data sets? AI isn’t just the engine but the data it needs to parse to for you what it thinks you’re asking. As a side note, all this said data, including copyright IP is being harvested for free. I’m not sure that dynamic lasts forever. I’m also concerned that with the dead internet theory, that data will be come less and less reliable with AI feeding off of other AI erroneous data.

LeftTesticleOfGreatn

And it's failed spectacularly at it! Bitcoin is ridiculously easy to track for the government, every single transaction tied to a IP and MAC adress (user). A quick mandatory check of your digital platforms (phone, pc) will confirm holdings and even a cold wallet is easy to confiscate. As for password the government has ways to make people talk. Ask people in Russia or China, their government are *the worlds largest bitcoin holders* due to state run mining and *illegal confiscation*. Also the intrinsic value of bitcoin is $0, it's litterary worthless outside short lived speculation.

JG98

>CRISPR has nothing on Sana. CRISPR is pursuing a device based approach based on Viacyte IP, which has failed over and over. Their deviceless approach is research stage (in other words, they have nothing) and there's no reason to believe they will use immune evasion methods that circumvent Sana's IP. Cripsr was a partner in that research and they were/are concurrently developing multiple methods for treatment. Your research isn't even fully clear on the biggest competitor working in this space. The device based approach was one approach, the failure of the treatment was not with the cells but rather with the pouch system itself that they have continued to develop. They are also working on a deviceless option which will be pure gene editing. Do you even know why they are working on a pouch protected option? Due to the major concern with offshoot effects from editing cells, which is something that has at least resulted in on market treatments unlike outright immune evasion. Crispr also has the advantage of having treatments on market. >Sana's technology has also been in development for more than a decade. The immune evasive tech was being worked on in academia well before the company was founded. They strategically positioned themselves extremely well. They have rights to all the IP needed for a functional T1D cure. And cas9 gene editing has resulted in actual treatments on the market, so point being? The specific editing technology is not the differentiator for Sana, you should play up at least the proper aspect of what they are doing. What you should be playing up is the actual approach in immune cloaking, the rest is irrelevant and not really much of a differentiator from cas9 or any of the other technologies used for similar purposes (ie. cas13). >It will probably be around 5 years to reach approval. This is literally the biggest meme on all the diabetes forums on this site. Feel free to give it any of those subs a look lmao. I've heard the same for dozens of solutions over the years, including for the highly hopeful ones for which I have been in the clinical trial eligibility stage (that includes Crispr/vertex before they split the product development and the trial was cancelled and relocated). >Moreover, their first phase 1 trial data, which we have every reason to believe will be positive, is extremely likely to be released next year. It will not take 5 years to know if their cure will work. Biologists who understand their tech deeply can already see it will work. Ah yes, this time will be different. No idea how many times I've seen reddit experts state the same. >Definitive larger scale data showing it working will be released in 1-2 years. The valuation will increase as that data is released. As I've said numerous times, they are completely undervalued right now, worth about half of what Vertex paid for a cure that won't work. I believe they are undervalued too, with risk adjusted expectations for the sector of course, but that is without the biased hype and purely based on the potential for even a first to market with limited scale solution. The Crispr solution is not any worse positioned to succeed, it ultimately comes down to offshoot effects/risks. 3/3

Floppedthenuts_

DFLI latest patent The patent filed by Dragonfly Energy appears to cover a mesh-networked communication system among multiple battery systems or modules, enabling data sharing, error propagation, robustness even when node(s) are unpowered, integrated into their “IntelLigence” platform. The announcement indicates that this will strengthen their IP and product offering.

Intrepid_Web5454

This is just misinformation. I've also followed this space closely. Sana has all the credibility in the world. Have literally published in all the best journals, world's leading scientists in this space have praised them. Sana's approach is completely different to what Viacyte and others have tried, you're comparing apples to oranges. It's very easy to see why Sana's tech works. Nobody has done completely immune evasive islets before them and nobody, not even CRISPR is even close. There is no reason Sana needs to implant anywhere other than the forearm. There is plenty of space and they've demonstrated the islets survive just fine there. They will be able to scale up. Those concerns are completely overblown. It takes \~1 billion cells to treat 1 patient. This is not a significant number of cells. That amount of cells can fit on your fingertip. It's a question of how cost-effective it will be for them to scale up, but this is a problem that can be solved at the very least with more capital. They have automated GMP manufacturing processes in place. CEO has given guidance that starting out they will be able to treat 10k-100K patients per year, which while small compared to the total T1D population, would still be extremely lucrative (likely high single to low double digit billion dollar annual revenue depending on their pricing). CRISPR has nothing on Sana. CRISPR is pursuing a device based approach based on Viacyte IP, which has failed over and over. Their deviceless approach is research stage (in other words, they have nothing) and there's no reason to believe they will use immune evasion methods that circumvent Sana's IP. Sana's technology has also been in development for more than a decade. The immune evasive tech was being worked on in academia well before the company was founded. They strategically positioned themselves extremely well. They have rights to all the IP needed for a functional T1D cure. It will probably be around 5 years to reach approval. This is very simply not a long time. Moreover, their first phase 1 trial data, which we have every reason to believe will be positive, is extremely likely to be released next year. It will not take 5 years to know if their cure will work. Biologists who understand their tech deeply can already see it will work. Definitive larger scale data showing it working will be released in 1-2 years. The valuation will increase as that data is released. As I've said numerous times, they are completely undervalued right now, worth about half of what Vertex paid for a cure that won't work.

betadonkey

Because NVIDIA is an American company subject to American export laws. Beyond that, the US government was also the primary financier behind ASML EUV development and I believe still holds significant IP in the venture. So even the chips made in Taiwan are still under multiple umbrellas.

southflhitnrun

So, anything and everything stores on Amazon Cloud can be used to train AI. The idea of owning IP has completely disappeared.

LumpaLard

I commented on the other post on this stock but: CSAI’s latest filings suggest revenue remains under $2–3 million annually with high cash burn. Achieving 300 percent growth would require both new client onboarding capacity and capital expenditure that the company cannot currently fund organically. Applying an 8x–10x EV/Sales multiple is unjustified for a microcap with no profitability, low visibility, and uncertain scaling. Such multiples apply to category leaders with high gross margins and sticky SaaS revenues.  Microcaps often cite “potential acquisition” as a bullish wildcard, but larger acquirers typically target companies with proprietary IP or recurring software ARR over $20–30M, not hardware-heavy firms with limited cash runway.  Microcaps frequently announce buybacks but never execute them; any valuation narrative based on stated but unexecuted repurchases is a bit premature The projection ($96M–$120M valuation) excludes net debt, share dilution, or operating losses. If CSAI requires new equity issuances in 2026, per-share value will likely erode even if enterprise value grows nominally.  Client examples - couldn't see any SEC or press-verified contract figures and without these, the client examples are marketing. I'll pass on this one but happy for someone to tell me I'm wrong!

hambone_83

>Like they don't currently have an extraction business, right? Just the IP? So what customers is he talking about? He's talking about his own customers that buy GTI products. You don't need an extraction business to have use for extraction technology. Its like a car manufacturer that buys a company that builds high quality engines. They can retain the knowledge to use when making their own engines for their cars (higher quality, more margin, more features) and still sell off the plant and equipment and not participate in selling engines on the side There are a ton of reviews that came out a few months after the Agrify acquisition that have people saying their carts and dabs are so much better. I took 30 seconds and found one but there is more: [https://www.reddit.com/r/NewJerseyMarijuana/comments/1jnubx4/rythm\_has\_been\_on\_a\_roll\_recently/](https://www.reddit.com/r/NewJerseyMarijuana/comments/1jnubx4/rythm_has_been_on_a_roll_recently/) Long story short, they are making their products better and have no interest in being an extraction company for others.

GeoLogic23

Idk feels just like CEO talk to me. Feels more like the IP wasn't really with anything so they "retained" it. Like they don't currently have an extraction business, right? Just the IP? So what customers is he talking about? To me it feels like if you are planning to focus on scaling beverages nationally, then you're just going to buy bulk cannabinoids from a company that specializes in that. Like Open Book Extracts or someone. The extracted product market if gigantic, and is doing fine without RYM's extraction IP. If they are one of the first brands to really scale nationally, they'll be able to negotiate a better price on huge bulk orders of cannabinoids. This seems like a much more cost effective strategy, and i think it aligns better with how beverages are usually produced.

hambone_83

>As the sale of the Cultivation Business and the exit of the Extraction Business represented strategic shifts...... They sold the cultivation and vertical farming businesses but "exited" the extraction business. GTI retained the technology/IP they wanted and sold off the remaining assets they didn't need in the extraction business. Ben even said in the earnings call afterwards that concentrates have highly sticky customers that they get good margins from and that Agrify would help them focus on this.

knowledge-panhandler

Uber ain't booking shit in 2 years. They own no autonomous IP. Obvious af

deviousbrutus

They don't physically make anything. They are just software and chip plans. They don't "make" the chips, they design. Their designs could be easily stolen and reproduced by any government that felt they didn't care about NVIDIA's IP. The issue is there's a whole Software eco system that help protect NVIDIAs IP. For now. NVIDIA's main strength was the drivers and software libraries they produced to support using their chips with AI/Machine learning applications (CUDA). That's what put them ahead and now they're taking advantage of that head start. It will eventually fall off. NVIDIA is a software company. They don't "make" hardware. They design it. Like Apple. You consider Apple a "hardware" company today?

HelpOuta49er

Zero protections on IP and Patent theft. Estimated loss to America is 850 BILLION plus a year. As of 7 years ago. That's just American losses. Trump campaigned on forcing IP and Patent protections on China. So china continues to steal their way to the top. Total garbage "deal".

salty0waldo

The division mentioned is Westinghouse, OEM reactor company. That name held a ton of weight back in the day. They are engineering EPC and service company to summarize it. They own IP of their designs. Many of the active PWRs are Westinghouse designs. They don’t own or operate the facility. They design and build the reactors and auxiliary systems. Usually the turbines are GE products, but now I’d have to refresh what was installed at Vogtle.

LostAbbott

There are a lot of people in here talking about the WB IP, which yeah is the obvious answer.  However, they real value at WB is the back lot and their network.  WB has by far and away the largest back lot of any of the studios, they can literally turn a show out from every decade of the 18th and 19th century and probably 20 others as well.  All from their back lot.  Cars, costumes, lighting, signs, carpet, etc...  they have an amazing number of people who can pull that out and make that show.  It saves hundred of thousands of dollars(sometimes per episode) when you can tap your own resources.  Then you start to look at all of the talent behind the camera and you really start to see future value from anything your writers room can come up with.  If Netflix pulls this off I might have to figure out how to double down...

RancidSmellingShit

Nintendo was able to build an economy of scale, and keep their users in their walled garden to sell games at top price to them. They have loyal fans who love their IP. OpenAI's only chance at profits is selling ad space; it's why they tried building a social platform, and now a browser, with neither of those doing what they needed, the only option left is to shove ad space in to ChatGPT. That is truly the only place where they can profit from now and as that degrades UX, people will switch to Gemini which won't have to rely on selling in chat ads.

BrickConnectCDN

I had a 9-year-old account get banned because it got hijacked by a pornbot and they rejected the appeal when I told them to look at IP logins that clearly showed it being accessed from somewhere else. Why the hell would I bother investing in them.

trade_thriving

I've been watching Netflix's content strategy evolve and this actually makes a lot of sense to me. They're already paying Warner Bros to produce shows like Stranger Things and Wednesday - why not just own the whole operation? The DC and Harry Potter IP alone could be massive for them. I mean, Disney proved how valuable owning your content library is. But honestly, I'm a bit skeptical about the price tag here. WBD has been struggling and thier debt situation is pretty rough from what I've seen. What I'm really curious about is how this would affect thier relationship with other studios. Netflix has deals all over Hollywood - would those dry up if they become a direct competitor to everyone?

Silver-Direction-938

This is true as well. This would be the worst case scenario for shareholders, but there should be a solid 12 months time to dump shares is this starts to look likely. I think it comes down to how valuable the IP is for competitors and are they willing to let others snatch it before them.

TAKINAS_INNOVATION

The IP could be valuable. Could be used for merchandise and licensing deals in the future. But Netflix shouldn’t get stuck in a bidding war and overpay for their assets. The last big media acquisition was Disney and fox. Comcast trolled the shit out of Disney and made a bid which forced Disney to bid even higher and they overpaid for it imo.

johnny_riser

One unfortunate possibility is also bankruptcy, and a coalition will bid for the IP at semiscraps, akin to Nortel.

NoInstruction623

Yet again another 'post' disguised as a faceseek ad. Faceseek is a scam. \- You have to pay for takedowns (takedowns on the service itself) which is illegal. \- Owner is paying a service to stay anonymous off of WHOIS. \- The service does not index anything itself and steals from other REAL AI facial recognition services. \- Because Faceseek does not index anything themselves you are often lead to broken links or pages where the image is no longer available. \- The facial recognition is worse than yandex. DO NOT USE. It is a honeypot for faces and IP addresses.

DEGENMONK

Look I might be retarded but from my POV, the compamy's value dropped on a comoliance issue with stock exchange, or some thecnical financial stuff like that. It had nothing to do with what theyre developing. So my take was, maybe the market overreacted on a scare of OTC threat pr sum shit like that, but their IP might still be worth something. I guess theyre in a situation where they might need funding for furthering research but at the same time they might get delisted which scares investors away. However the CEO is mega bag holding. Thats as far as my DD goes lol. In my book, thats a risk im willing to take with a lil 2k to 3k But I had the same thought as you, I would be more comfy going in around .20 cent but like I said depending on INTS returns might just say fuck it and try to get like 10k shares.

Silver-Direction-938

The company won't go permanently under with that much IP even when the cash runs out in 2027. It will be bought, but at what price? I was hoping 40-50$, but we will find out. Trump ate the lunch from the new vaccines, way to go US of A.