
Ras Kapital
81.1K posts

Ras Kapital
@bugimane
drunken master baiter | bighead scientist





Please do a quick read of this. It’s short, well written, and will remove a bit of wool from over your eyes.

🦔Microsoft canceled its internal Claude Code licenses this week after token-based billing made the cost untenable, even for a company with effectively infinite cloud resources. Uber's CTO sent an internal memo warning the company burned through its entire 2026 AI budget in just four months. American AI software prices have jumped 20% to 37%, and GitHub (owned by Microsoft) is dropping flat-rate plans for usage-based billing across its products. My Take The AI subsidy era is ending in real time. The same company that put $13 billion into OpenAI and built the Azure infrastructure powering most of Anthropic's compute just looked at the bill from a competitor's coding tool and decided it was not worth paying. That is not a productivity failure on Anthropic's end. Token-based pricing is forcing every enterprise customer to confront the actual cost of running these models at scale, and the number turns out to be far higher than the flat-rate experiments suggested. This ties directly to my Gemini Flash post yesterday. Anthropic, OpenAI, and Google all raised effective prices in the last six months. Enterprises that built workflows assuming AI costs would keep falling are now watching annual budgets evaporate in months. Two outcomes look likely from here. Either enterprises scale back AI usage to fit budgets, which slows the revenue ramp the labs need to justify their valuations ahead of IPOs, or the labs cut prices and absorb the losses, which makes the unit economics worse at exactly the wrong moment. Both paths land in the same place, the numbers stop working, and somebody has to take the writedown. Hedgie🤗

Billionaire Jeff Bezos says redistributing his wealth “won’t help.” “You could double the taxes that I pay, and it’s not going to help that teacher in Queens. I promise you.”



Something deeply uncomfortable is happening to the Nasdaq-100. SpaceX is targeting a $1.75 trillion IPO. Nasdaq wants the listing over NYSE. So Nasdaq is rewriting its own rulebook. Here's what they are proposing: 1️⃣ "Fast Entry" rule: any mega-cap IPO gets added to the index after just 15 trading days — bypassing all standard seasoning and liquidity requirements. 2️⃣ A 5x multiplier for low-float stocks: if SpaceX floats just 5% of shares, passive funds are forced to buy as if it were weighted at 25% of total market cap — $438 billion of phantom weighting. The result? Tens of billions of price-insensitive passive dollars — your pension, your ETF, your QQQ — are legally mandated to buy SpaceX at whatever price it trades to on Day 15. Hedge funds will front-run this guaranteed bid aggressively. Then when the lock-up expires, insiders flood the market with shares — at the exact moment passive funds are again forced to buy more. "If you're playing a poker game and you look around the table and can't tell who the sucker is, it's you." The sucker is every passive investor in a Nasdaq ETF.


🚀 SpaceX - Governance #6 Board Committees and who is considered independent, and who is not SpaceX is establishing two standing committees: 1. Audit Committee Members (expected upon IPO): - Randy Glein – Chair and expected “audit committee financial expert” - Steve Jurvetson - One additional member (to be named within the one-year period allowed by Nasdaq/Nasdaq Texas rules) Note: All members must be independent directors. This committee is not exempt from independence requirements even though SpaceX is a controlled company. 2. Compensation and Nominating Committee (combined committee) Members (expected upon IPO): - Ira Ehrenpreis – Chair - Antonio J. Gracias - Luke Nosek Note: As a controlled company, SpaceX is exempt from the requirement that this committee be composed entirely of independent directors. Ira Ehrenpreis and Luke Nosek qualify as independent; Antonio Gracias does not. No other board committees are mentioned in the S-1. The full board will handle all other governance matters until additional committees are formed later. Why is Antonio Garcias not considered "independent"? The S-1 points to 2 main factors the board considered when assessing independence (page 195): - Beneficial ownership of capital stock by the director and/or investment funds or other entities affiliated with them. - The relationships set forth under “Certain Relationships and Related Person Transactions”. Antonio Gracias is the founder, CEO, and Chief Investment Officer of Valor Equity Partners. Valor has had multiple large transactions with SpaceX (including equity investments and other business arrangements). Because of these material relationships and his control over Valor-affiliated entities that own a significant stake in SpaceX, he fails the independence tests under Nasdaq/Nasdaq Texas listing standards. This is why he can serve on the Compensation & Nominating Committee (thanks to the controlled-company exemption), but he is not counted as an “independent director” for governance purposes.

Is the SpaceX IPO about the collapse the stock market?

It’s wild to think that white folks all danced like this before Elvis hit the scene.

JUST IN: Starbucks retires AI inventory tool across North America after it reportedly miscounted & mislabeled store items.

#ALERTE 🚨 : Tentative d’intrusion à l’hôpital de Rwampara « Nous sommes actuellement enfermés à l’hôpital de Rwampara. Des manifestants tentent de récupérer de force les corps des personnes décédées d’Ebola. Ils commencent également à incendier certaines installations de l’hôpital. La situation est extrêmement tendue et nécessite une intervention urgente des autorités compétentes afin de sécuriser les patients, le personnel médical et les infrastructures sanitaires », explique une source sur le lieu.



What's your honest thoughts about Clive Davis?

The Trump administration is closing the nation's primary bee research laboratory.

🇺🇸🇨🇺






