Notxnote

I appreciate your contributions and the attention you’re paying to my work. My goal is to provide a transparent and simplified look behind the scenes of these companies. Each note is composed by synthesizing both current and historical news and documents, current data to explain the present, and history to identify recurring patterns or where the problems began. For every company, I analyze between 40 and 60 documents. Since I’m summarizing hundreds of pages of reports and charts into a one-minute read, it is impossible to include every single detail. While I use custom-built technology to gather information, every note is written by my own pen. Using AI for high-level analysis of this volume of data is currently unthinkable; it would be too expensive and would compromise my identity and the quality of the research. I would have to rely on incredibly powerful cloud models with massive context windows that don't hallucinate when processing that mountain of information. I only use AI for minor text corrections, and even then, I quickly burn through the usage limits set by the providers. I actually really value your observation about the connections between actors and attorneys. It’s a feature I’ve been wanting to offer: an internal agent on my site that answers user questions based on the notes, including tracking specific individuals involved in multiple scandals. I’d honestly love to get your feedback on the service, from the posts on X to the site interface. Is there anything you’d add or change?

@notxnote So you are using AI to generate these reports please notxnote there are distinct connections with these companies , attorneys, and methods of deceit to rape the investor ?

Ah, got it! You are absolutely right, you’re referring to the Spring 2025 setup that laid the groundwork for the October inducement. You are 100% correct on those mechanics. To give you some transparency on why I omitted that specific Spring batch from the final text: my goal is to synthesize 40 to 60 complex filings/articles/news into a straightforward, one-minute read. If I map out every single intermediate offering, warrant exercise, and step-by-step inducement, the note turns into a 10-page SEC textbook and loses its accessibility. I usually focus on the starting point of the decay, the most critical recent catalysts (like the October deal that created the massive 16.18 million overhang we see today), and the final mathematical reality. But your breakdown is spot on and perfectly highlights the exact 'financial extraction' machinery I talk about. Seriously, this is exactly the kind of deep-in-the-weeds detail I appreciate seeing in the replies. Thanks for laying it out!

@notxnote No sir I refer to the 1st batch of warrants when the price of stock was that day $2.83 pre market in spring of 2025. Shallcross did the offering 0f 1 share/ w 1 warrant for . 55. Then in October he offered the inducement of 16.12 mil warrants for exercising 1st set of warrants

You’re right on the aggressive pricing, the October deal at $0.54 was a massive discount compared to the $0.84 price at the time. My notes have the total warrant count for that specific syndicate at 16.18 million, but the core issue is exactly what you mentioned: the mechanical reality of the dilution.

@notxnote Good analysis of $tovx except you have the story on warrants mixed up . First 7.2 mill was immediately following an offering where the company priced them in half of the current stock price.

Appreciate the feedback. You’re 100% spot on, short-term it’s definitely a mechanical game, especially with that low float setup. My goal is just to make sure the structural math is out there so people know exactly what’s under the hood once the mechanical move settles. Thanks for the insight!

@notxnote good breakdown. the fundamentals explain why it can't sustain, but low float + weak fundamentals is exactly the setup that drives the day trade move. short term it's mechanical, not fundamental

@grok @memely Ty Grok!

Steven Shallcross does not appear in this specific deep dive because Frederick T. Sullivan is the CFO managing the current financial situation. Regardless of who held the title in the past, the current mathematical reality of Senseonics shows that the 'extraction' playbook is still very much in effect. While the company lost $69.1 million last year, CFO Sullivan and the COO split a $3.3 million compensation package, and CEO Timothy Goodnow took home $3.34 million. They are currently printing 16 million new units to sell for $5.00 each just to keep the lights on, despite the actual value of their assets being only $1.35 per share. This desperate move is a requirement from their lender, Hercules Capital, which is effectively holding their remaining $64.6 million in cash hostage. We can debate the names of the individuals involved, but the math shows that the current leadership is still prioritizing executive payouts and massive debt while the public is sold paper that loses more than half its value the second the money changes hands.

@notxnote And Steven Shallcross was the CFO for a period of time crooks?

It’s fascinating that you openly admit my research is correct, yet you're still arguing. Let me clarify your vocabulary: a 'crook' implies someone breaking the law. I never said they were doing anything illegal. What they are doing, executing five reverse splits, printing massive amounts of shares, and securing huge executive payouts while sitting on a $413.5 million accumulated deficit, is entirely legal. That is precisely why I define it as a 'mechanism for financial extraction'. You can disagree with the 'conclusions' all you want, but you cannot disagree with a calculator. If the data is correct, which you just admitted it is, the mathematical outcome remains exactly the same, regardless of how much you dislike the words I use to describe it. While I appreciate you acknowledging that the data is correct, it seems absurd to come down here just to argue over the tone I used. These are my personal notes that I offer to the public completely for free to help them see companies transparently, and I write them with my own distinct identity. I’m not saying I don't expect criticism, but it feels like you're grasping at straws just to find a reason to attack the service. The reality is that this service is bulletproof. I offer my personal notes for free, so what ground do you really have to stand on? Furthermore, I provide a level of accessible depth that you rarely see, especially while trying to cover as many companies as possible. I obviously prioritize quality, but if I left a specific detail out, it's highly likely because it's irrelevant to my service's core mission: simply explaining the behind-the-scenes math of a company. I’ve never seen this much hostility directed at Bloomberg or the New York Times, even though they miss information all the time. I don't see you in their comment sections whining about their 'tone' or what they left out. I'm obviously not comparing myself to them, but if someone is handing you something of this value for free, be smart and just enjoy it without being a pain in the ass. But if you play with fire, you’re going to get burned. For every comment you write, you will always get a reply that shuts you down completely, precisely because my service is real, functional, and undeniable. Until I start marketing this as the 'greatest research of the century' and charging $100 a month for it, I really shouldn't be receiving this kind of baseless negativity.

@notxnote @signalman91 "Mechanism for financial extraction ... designed to burn through capital while providing almost nothing in return to its owners". It's a fancy way of saying crooks, but it means crooks. You can't possibly argue you're being objective. Your article is loaded with biased language

You admit it yourself: you are relying on 'hope' and what you are 'betting on.' My research isn't built on hope, speculative peer ratios, or assuming future capitalizations. I analyze the actual balance sheet. The math I included is the $260.0 million contract and the reality that the cash received will immediately flow out to pay hardware manufacturers and data center landlords. I also included the 15.0 million shares tied to warrants at just $0.01 each and the plan to sell up to $18.33 million in newly printed shares. That is structural reality, not speculation. And history absolutely matters when the exact same dilution machinery is still active to pay the new leadership. Regardless, at the end of the day, these are my personal notes, offered to the public entirely for free. They dive much deeper into the filings than most expensive, subscription-based editorial services out there. I fully accept that you disagree with my conclusions, but the entitlement is absurd. Before you even jumped into this thread, I had people baselessly calling the content 'fake' or 'shallow' without reading a single line. I don't understand the hostility when the data is 100% correct, simply explained in my own style. It is very strange to face all these aggressive demands when what I offer is a free resource and I'm not putting on airs. You are free to bet on your hopes.

@notxnote @signalman91 But you didn't care to put that math into your research, since you started with the conclusion that it's DoA. Again, AGPU is now a SPAC for Aethir. Their history (I hope, and is what I'm betting on) no longer matters.

Claiming my research contains 'opinions' just because you only read a piece of it is not a valid basis for a debate. Let me make this perfectly clear: the writing style is undeniably mine, but the logic and the numbers are strictly mathematical. A $413.5 million accumulated deficit is not an opinion. Having 15.0 million shares tied to warrants that institutional investors can exercise for just $0.01 each is not an opinion. You argue that 'data centers are clearly profitable' as a general concept. Sure, but we aren't discussing the macroeconomic sector. We are discussing this specific company's broken internal math. The math doesn't care about your feelings, and my data isn't up for debate just because you don't like how it's written.

@notxnote @signalman91 I read it. Some of it is research, some of it is opinion. I think your opinion is incorrect. It's also loaded with biased language. Yes they need to spend money on a bunch of GPUs. Yes they probably have to dilute to do it. However, data centers are clearly profitable.

@Da_Lambo @signalman91 Who said anything about crooks? My notes report on corporate transparency as objectively as possible, relying strictly on real data. If the internal movements I uncover seem 'shady' to you, that’s not a fault of my transparency, it’s a reflection of the company’s reality.

@notxnote @signalman91 Most listed companies fail. If you analyze them ex post facto they will always look like crooks. POAI was not a scam. They just didn't succeed. AGPU is not a scam. They may succeed.

It's not my fault you didn't bother to read the full note, despite it being explicitly labeled as just an excerpt. You are only making your own ignorance more obvious by demanding 'research' on data that has already been analyzed and published. If you prefer to ignore the facts right in front of you, that's your problem, not mine.

@notxnote This is an ignorant post. Axe Computer is an entirely new business with new leadership. The legacy business and leadership have nothing to do with its future performance. Please do some research or just delete this post because it’s objectively incorrect.

It’s funny when you clearly haven't taken the time to read the full research. If you had, you’d know that Kyle Okamoto is explicitly mentioned, including his $360k salary and 300k options. The pivot to AI and the deal with Aethir are also fully documented. My research doesn't ignore the 'new' business; it exposes that despite the new name and leadership, the underlying math remains a disaster: $413.5 million in accumulated deficit and a legal obligation to spend massive amounts of cash on hardware that becomes obsolete in three years. New leadership doesn't fix a broken machine designed to print shares to pay for its own existence. Next time, try reading the data before telling me to do 'research' on information I’ve already published.

@signalman91 @notxnote Second this. New president is Kyle Okamoto, who jumped over from Aethir. New director is Theodore Zhu, PhD in semiconductors. They are no longer in biotech, they are a cloud AI provider. And it appears they're using POAI as a SPAC for Aethir.

So after all that flaming, now you’re asking for documents? You took it for granted that everything was false without even having the information in your possession. How exactly do you expect to be treated after that? I’m sorry to break it to you, but behind this service, you didn't find a sycophant or a robot. You found a person who uses the toxicity of X as toilet paper. You’re acting like a dog, and you will be treated as such. Furthermore, as any respectable research deserves, I have structured my notes chronologically to clearly explain cause and effect. As I’ve already reported, the entire point of this project is to publish my personal research for free. So, where exactly is the problem? I would expect to see this same behavior toward every financial service that offers reporting, yet I don’t see that on your profile. Instead, I notice as much hatred as there are falsehoods thrown at my notes, most likely because the truth is unpleasant for those who waste their money and time on these companies. X is overflowing with fake, paid-for garbage, yet you come into my notes, spread falsehoods, and then actually expect me to grant your requests? You guys are fucking ridiculous.

@notxnote @KaliLin91814229 Ok let’s go through it; Where is it stated the BTC is held by Biconomy? Care to share the internal documents you’ve seen that show you they plan on a RS, I’ve not seen any? Honestly couldn’t care less what was done pre Jan 2024 by WISA, so I’ll not comment that info

You couldn't even justify why you'd call it a 'farce,' could you? It’s most likely because it feels too real to be true. I get it, you’re used to low-quality services. Regardless, the only change I’ve made was a stylistic update two days ago, so any comments following that modification are as idiotic as they are amusing.

@notxnote @KaliLin91814229 It’s been changed. It now allows me to read the shit show you call “research” without putting a CC in 😆

Before writing this comment, did you take the time to read the full note? You’ve clearly demonstrated that you didn't even read the post properly, as it explicitly states it is an excerpt from a much deeper analysis. You talk as if providing this level of research is common practice, but 90% of financial posts on X are just 'buy' signals or rehashed Google news. If you're so concerned about the depth of research, I’d expect to see this same comment from you on hundreds of thousands of other financial posts then.

@notxnote Do some research on the new CEO and who he is. Not the same company as it was. Management is key here

@KaliLin91814229 @Ben4728473 Clowns, this isn't a circus. If you claim there’s a registration required, prove it. Otherwise, your words carry as much weight as your personalities: zero.

@notxnote @Ben4728473 They requested I sign up too Your not to smart are you

@Ben4728473 @KaliLin91814229 Can you send me an exact screenshot of my platform where you are required to sign up? Big talker, I’m waiting

@notxnote @KaliLin91814229 The whole redirecting to a payment processor..? Sure I’m defo gonna sign up for a free trial to a nobody’s “research” 💀

It’s great to know that the product is improving your health; as noted, the company’s mission is noble. However, my service does not deal with product reviews or personal opinions; my goal is to provide transparency regarding internal financial flows, especially in small-cap companies. While it’s common for startups to lose money, I show how and where that money flows: Three executives drew over $21.0 million in compensation while the company recorded a net loss of $73.2 million by December 2025. For every $1.00 earned, the company spends $1.71 just to stay afloat. The company’s bylaws provide for an automatic 6% increase in the number of shares each year, steadily reducing the value of small investors’ stakes. While the stock price was high, executives used legal schemes to sell thousands of shares, cashing out hundreds of thousands of dollars. A product may work excellently for the end user, but objective data reveals a financial structure designed to shift public capital into the pockets of insiders through stock issuances and bonuses, while the operating cash flow is on track to run dry by June 2028. I provide the cash flow data; the assessment of the business’s sustainability rests on the data, not on personal preferences.

So, aren't you describing every public startup company that ever existed? BTW, their product works for me. I have used the iLet Bionic Pancreas for over a year. It has allowed me to move my A1c's down from over 8.4 (average for 20 years) to 7.0 to 7.1 in 90 days. @BetaBionics #T1d

On the contrary, if you want to give advice or criticism, your tone and your failure to provide context will always put you in the wrong,and providing context is your obligation. It’s called manners and respect, things you demand but haven't shown since your very first message. I’m sorry for you that you met someone like me who won’t be walked over and who doesn't just care about the numbers. If people like you don't like the service, I don't care; in fact, it's even better. But you need to learn how to speak and show some respect. I actually find this toxicity on X quite pitiful. The only thing you know how to do is attack, but the problem is that you’re simply not good at debating. I have literally shut you down with every single reply I've sent. Yet you're stupid enough to keep going, constantly changing the subject. Eventually, you'll run out of things to say and there will be no arguments left for you to attack.

@notxnote @ThaRealGoatQwam I’m not obligated to break things down for you. Word of advice, you should reflect and think if this is the best way to promote yourself or your platform. I’m not sold on either, personally.

Keep talking and judging without ever contextualizing a single thing you say. When someone fails to provide context, the value of their words is exactly zero. I’m sorry you don’t like the platform, even saying 'your platform sucks',what kind of feedback is that? You’re contradicting yourself and digging your own grave. I'm sorry you just don't have the capacity to understand that.

@notxnote @ThaRealGoatQwam You’re a moron, respectfully. You should try giving out respect before you demand it and your platform sucks.