Michael Shad

@IonQ_Inc The more I study the companies that consistently win, the more a pattern stands out. They don’t just build products..they build the system around them. Apple built a closed loop of hardware, software, services, and distribution. NVIDIA didn’t stop at chips.. they built the software layer and developer ecosystem that everything runs through. Tesla connected vehicles, energy, and infrastructure into one integrated system. IonQ is doing the same.. not just building quantum computers, but building the full stack: hardware, cloud access, software, networking, secure communications, and manufacturing partnerships. That kind of integration is what creates real staying power. It’s not about one product,.. it’s about owning the system the future runs on.

I’m impressed with HQ too. I’ve been digging into it and started building a position. What stands out to me is where they fit...IonQ and others handle hardware, HQ is building the software layer across it all. If that plays out, they’re not competing in the ecosystem, they’re connecting it.

@avgvalueinvest What was really impressive tidy was when @jfitzsimons talked about possibly being in a position to demonstrate quantum advantage related to certain chemistry platforms. That is so significant. Overall, I was extremely impressed with what $HQ shared today.

Very interesting article from @HannaSuds about Horizon $HQ. Lots of good information especially for $IONQ investors (they own over 13% of the company). Interesting to read about their ability to work with multiple modalities. I have plenty of time multiple modalities will win in quantum. Interesting that IonQ just announced their DARPA award under the HARQ program which is to create networked architectures among different modalities. Definitely some overlap and I do wonder if IonQ will either acquire or make a larger investment. Software will play a key role in quantum's future.

@OfficialJoel4_ Oreo

No words begins with O and end with O Prove me wrong!!

@genejchan @StoneJAlex I'm gonna poke my eyes out when I get home

@StoneJAlex The fuck did I read

BlueSky is full of such weird people

@genejchan @StoneJAlex No shit!!! WTF has happened to the world since yesterday???

I’m really glad you got that time to reconnect with friends. There’s something special about being around people who understand you. I know how much those moments mean, and I’m happy you had the opportunity to spend some time doing that. I'm Looking forward to what you’ve been working on.

It’s been an extraordinarily three days connecting with old friends from literally around the word committed to a similar view of our responsibilities that I embrace. The past few days have been deeply meaningful and had reaffirmed certain future plans I’ve been working on. Today, I will be releasing my first detailed report on $HQ (Horizon Quantum - @horizon_quantum), followed tomorrow on a report on what to expect on the upcoming earnings call from $IonQ.

@OfficialJoel4_ 56 it's upside down

OK PAY ATTENTION TO DETAILS Nobody is yet to find the number 👀 What number is in the box? RT Correct answer wins $800 Ends 50 hrs

A few lines in this letter stand out: “preeminent full-stack quantum platform and merchant supplier” “capture value at every layer of the stack” “invested in all key areas of quantum technology” “over 60% of revenue from the commercial sector” “nearly 80% of bookings from organic compute business” “10,000x faster time-to-solution” “~$30M unit economics at scale” Those aren’t casual statements. That’s boss talk.

$IonQ $SKYT 🚨 The 2025 10-K dropped. 132 pages. First annual report under @NiccoloDeMasi De Masi’s full year as Chairman & CEO of @IonQ_Inc . 🚨 Numbers the February press release did not break out at this granularity: → Quantum hardware revenue $69.9M, up 224%. Services $60.1M, up 180%. Hardware now leads the mix for the first time. → Switzerland $16.6M, up 975% YoY. Other international $26.4M, up from $0.8M. International went from roughly 5% of revenue in 2024 to 33% in 2025. → Customer concentration: 77% from the top 2 in 2024 → 53% from the top 3 in 2025. Diversification, not just growth. → Remaining performance obligations: $370M as of Dec 31. Roughly 5x vs year-end 2024. 40% expected to convert within twelve months about $148M already contracted into the 2026 guide. → Patents: 610 issued, 514 pending, 131 exclusive licenses (University of Maryland, Duke). Expirations through 2043. → Fault-tolerant machine target unit cost at scale: ~$30M. The framing is explicit: no helium-3, no rare earths, no constrained supply chains. The 10-K’s own competition section quantifies why the architecture matters 1,000:1 to 100,000:1 error-correction overhead for superconducting (Google, IBM, Rigetti named), 10,000:1+ for photonic (PsiQuantum, Xanadu named). De Masi in the shareholder letter: “industry hype about gate speed, coherence time, and qubit count falls apart when the systems are science experiments that can’t solve real world problems.” That is the CEO of a public quantum company. Not a competitor. Not an analyst. As we covered from the February release 202% GAAP revenue growth, 80% organic compute, ambition to be the first quantum company past ten figures of revenue. The 10-K codifies the conviction underneath: cost-per-compute as the decisive commercial variable, not qubit count theater. Read the De Masi letter first. Pages 1 through 4. 🔗 sec.gov/Archives/edgar… $IONQ #IonQ #QuantumComputing

$IONQ Florida is connecting its universities and 21 military bases to one shared network. This network needs protection from future quantum attacks. IonQ is helping add that protection. If the network uses IonQ's security system, every school, hospital, and government office on it uses it too. It's how one contract can turn into many customers.

@HannaSuds @IonQ_Inc @NiccoloDeMasi Yes it has been a very impressive year to say the least.

To the best of my knowledge and a meaningful and successful history of investing, I have never witnessed any corporate leader cultivate, integrate, and nurture a kaleidoscope of business ecosystems the way @NiccoloDeMasi has operated IonQ during this transformative year that has unquestionably seen IonQ become the global leader in a variety of quantum technology platforms. The IonQ community at-large is lucky to have Niccolo at the helm. On a personal note, I increased my already significant ownership of IonQ by 8% this week. Most of you see the detailed reports and the ongoing DD I conduct to continue to monitor my investments across multiple platforms. But truth is this: at the core of these investments is an incredible belief in Niccolo. Is that simple: he was made to operate IonQ, and there is nobody anywhere that could have completed what multitiered internal and enterprise build Niccolo has.

"As I close my first full year as Chairman & CEO of IonQ, 2025 stands out as a clear inflection point – not just in what we have built, but in how we are building it. We have evolved beyond our origins as a quantum computing pioneer to become the world’s preeminent full-stack quantum platform and merchant supplier." Read @NiccoloDeMasi's new Letter to Shareholders: linkedin.com/pulse/2025-ann…

Niccolo isn't building this after demand shows up. He’s putting the rails down before most people even realize what needs to run on them. That flips the dynamic. Instead of competing for workloads later, you shape how those workloads get deployed in the first place. At that point, it’s not about having the best system.. (even though ionQ does) it’s about defining the environment everything else has to operate in. That’s a much harder position to displace.

Niccolo de Masi said he's building the strongest, deepest, and broadest ecosystem. I've thought about what that actually means. Strongest means IonQ owns the core layers across compute, memory, transport, timing, and comms and that stack gives them real pricing power and strategic independence. Deepest means they're vertically integrated from the physics layer up through orchestration and trust infrastructure. Broadest means they're embedding into sovereign infrastructure so others have to plug into their rails. I think he's playing for control of the substrate.

@genejchan @DeItaone Your right Gene,if you have a problem with Elon why invest in his companies? Don't make much sense! The man has a grand vision and you either believe in it or you don't. Removing him isn't the issue here.

@DeItaone So what - if you don't like it, don't buy the stock

ELON MUSK CAN ONLY BE REMOVED FROM SPACEX BOARD OR OFFICER ROLES BY A VOTE OF THE SHARE CLASS HE CONTROLS, IPO FILING SHOWS

@HannaSuds I agree I've been adding on every deep pull back I bought a good size chunk today intraday and am looking to add more on every day it pulls back.. I've never had a stronger conviction in ionQ going into earnings.

$IonQ After extensive research on a continual basis I added fairly significantly to my IonQ position this morning. Why? Because my continued research tells me to do that at this level. I’ve never been more confident in the company and its leadership.

@HannaSuds That sounds amazing I'm glad your getting to go do that with him. That's one thing I miss about my grandma is going to see all the launches. Hope you both have an amazing time.. I got to say I'm a little jealous.. 😂

Every launch at the Cape is special but watching the Falcon Heavy’s launch are spectacular. So looking forward to tomorrow’s launch in person with my son.

@genejchan Forte is already delivering realworld results. Businesses don’t care about theorythey care about outcomes. If this is what the ‘old’ system can do, the nextgen machines aren’t about proving anything… they’re about scaling it.

We keep delivering results on the old $IONQ Forte, what do you think is gonna happen with the next-gen machines? Businesses care about real improvements over their existing solutions - they're not waiting for some mathematical proof of superpolynomial speedup

@HannaSuds @TechInnovationz Can't say enough about the work @TechInnovationz does the weekly recaps are always great, and of course @HannaSuds I think your work stands alone as some of the best out there. Thank you both for your hard work it is unparalleled!

$IonQ The tireless and highly informative effort of our very good friend @TechInnovationz is so greatly appreciated. Take a look at the video - well done.

@genejchan @flntwd @smdcapital @DanBTC916 Mixing mechanics with assumptions that are far from a guarantee is not a clean path.

@flntwd @smdcapital @DanBTC916 Elon doesn't think the way you think he thinks Don't judge a titan from the perspective of a midget

This is a long write-up but worth the read for Tesla investors who are interested in the prospect of a Tesla / SpaceX merger. @smdcapital @DanBTC916 As a former big law M&A attorney, I have been thinking about this potential transaction for many months now, trying to figure out how it would work, what the timing would be, mechanics, structure, etc. With the recent decline in TSLA stock and negative sentiment following last week’s call, many Tesla bulls (I won’t name names) are now working overtime to convince followers that a near-term merger following SpaceX’s IPO is the right path forward. Indeed, Elon seemed to be dropping some hints with his commentary about Terafab, particularly the inherent conflicts and the difficulty in parsing out rights and responsibilities between each company. And I do think Elon has had this thought in the back of his mind for the past few years, seeing the combination of his companies under a single structure as inevitable. I also think, through his actions and inactions (delays, missed deadlines, moving goal posts, divisiveness, politics, lack of enthusiasm on quarterly calls, etc.), he has kept the TSLA share price suppressed with that ultimate goal in mind. Occam’s razor. So here are the mechanics. SpaceX is expected to IPO at a $1.75-$2.0T valuation. It will have a dual-class share structure, where Elon retains the voting shares. Tesla has a single class share structure where each share has both voting and economic interests. For a near-term merger to be viable, Elon has to ensure SpaceX maintains or exceeds its IPO valuation, and Tesla valuation stays at or below current levels. Why? It is almost guaranteed that SpaceX would be the surviving entity in a merger scenario, so Elon can maintain the dual-class share structure and thus, maintain majority voting control. It is not legally possible to implement this type of structure at Tesla post-IPO, so the only way to keep it is if SpaceX is the surviving entity. And in order to convince Tesla shareholders to give up their voting rights in exchange for non-voting, economic shares in SpaceX (which is how such deals are commonly structured), SpaceX will have to offer a premium to Tesla holders — precedent is in the range of 20-40%. If Tesla is trading at a similar valuation to SpaceX, e.g., $2.0 trillion, and SpaceX has to pay a 20-40% premium to entice Tesla shareholders to approve the deal and give up their voting rights, then SpaceX shareholders would be diluted and are less likely to approve the transaction. If SpaceX is trading at $2.0 trillion and TSLA at its current $1.4 trillion market cap ($375/share), SpaceX can offer a 40% premium ($2.0 trillion valuation, $525/share, top-end of precedent) and avoid dilution. TSLA shareholders would almost certainly approve such an offer in light of current sentiment and Elon’s recent guidance (or lack thereof). Keeping the TSLA share price suppressed is the only way any near-term merger is viable in my opinion. I understand why Elon wants to combine the companies. It would significantly simplify governance and streamline his workload. And I ultimately think a combination of the two companies in the future makes sense. But the reality is, we have waited patiently for years now (with the stock trading lower today than it traded 5 years ago!), and we are finally on the cusp of a significant re-rating once robotaxi is scaled and Optimus goes into volume production. As a Tesla shareholder, I would prefer to consider a merger with SpaceX after the re-rating, when Tesla is trading at a much higher valuation. Why give it up now in the 11th hour when we’ve waited this long already? At the end of the day, what’s good for Elon isn’t necessarily good for Tesla shareholders.

@genejchan @G0ffThew Exactly Gene in a world full of less than smart people (M+r*ns) why risk it. It may turn out the rest of the world is trusting but it could very well turn out they fall short by one vote. It may sound less human to some people but I think the smart ones hedge

@G0ffThew Bad take. Pressing red is about trust - trusting that the rest of the world is not stupid If everyone press red, everyone lives Pressing blue is pure virtue signalling that does not actually improve the outcome of the world as a whole

The calculus to press red is, to put it kindly, short-sighted idiot math. It begins and ends with “what input gives me the best odds of living” with no regard for what the world you’d be living in - where everyone you can trust is dead and everyone else knows it - would look like

@DesFrontierTech I know it.. I'm looking forward to earnings!

$IONQ T minus 12 days to IonQ's Q1 earnings call.

@genejchan @zerohedge No kidding right!!

@zerohedge Are we at the stage of not caring yet?

US Intercepts Iranian Tankers From Hormuz To Indian Ocean, As Tehran Diplomats Cite 'Breakthrough' Toward Restarting Talks zerohedge.com/geopolitical/u…