Mark Boon

$DGXX shareholders, your voice matters. Without noise, there are no answers. Without noise, they do whatever they want. With enough noise, they think twice next time. 🔃 Share it so we might get answers in the interview. Still unanswered: 1️⃣ Who exactly holds the 35%? Vestberg’s name shouldn’t hide what may be behind it. Here’s why the breakdown matters, simple math. Say an insider allegedly owns 5% of $DGXX. Before the spinoff, they also indirectly owned ~5% of USDC. Same as every shareholder. If that same insider reportedly received 10% of USDC directly through the spinoff, even after giving XYZ% to Vestberg: ⇢ Before: 5% of DGXX → 5% of USDC ⇢ After: 5% of DGXX + 10% of USDC directly They may not have lost anything. They could have gained. Shareholders went from 100% of USDC to 55%. That’s why we need the individual breakdown. Not the group total. 2️⃣ Who are the $800K ‘seed investors’ who reportedly set the $10M valuation? No names. No audit. 3️⃣ No shareholder vote. No 21-day notice. Their own 8-K admits it. And think about what COULD come next - this is speculative, but the precedent is real: ➡️ Pleasants Park - 1.3 GW power plant. What if they co-found a new entity, bring in a big name, give Google 1%, and keep 34% for insiders? Repeat the word ‘Google’ until nobody asks questions. ➡️ North Tonawanda - 123 MW, nuclear-adjacent. Same playbook. ‘Spinning out our nuclear division’ with Nano Nuclear Energy. Big name. Insiders take 35%. Shareholders diluted again. In any real strategic move; a merger, a spinoff, a co-founding, alignment means everyone gives something up short-term because they believe in the long-term. Shareholders diluted from 100% to 55%? That’s giving something up. But if insiders allegedly went from 5% of USDC to 5% of DGXX + 10% of USDC directly? They didn’t give anything up. They may have gained. Immediately. On day one. Alignment means you hurt together or you win together. When only one side wins from the start, that’s not strategy. If they’re considering something similar for North Tonawanda, North Carolina, Pleasants Park... ... your silence makes it easier. Your voice makes them think twice. Don’t be passive. The precedent is being set right now. _____ Let me be clear about something. This has nothing to do with whether $DGXX is undervalued or not. I believe it is. If I didn’t, I would have sold and moved on. This is about protecting shareholder interests for the medium and long term. The assets are real. The vision is real. The AI infrastructure play is real. But none of that justifies insiders potentially enriching themselves at shareholders’ expense, without a vote, without notice, without transparency on who got what. Believing in $DGXX is exactly why this matters. If not, I wouldn't be putting any effort on this and just move on to another company. Don’t be passive.