Barrons : The Endeavor Merger Is Done. But the Fight Is Still On for a Better Pa

The Endeavor Merger Is Done. But the Fight Is Still On for a Better Payout.

When shareholders are unhappy with a merger, they generally try to kill it or improve the terms before the transaction closes.

In the case of Silver Lake’s $13 billion buyout of Endeavor Group Holdings, they are using an obscure Delaware rule that allows them to challenge the terms after the deal is completed, using so-called appraisal rights.

It is shaping up as the biggest appraisal rights case ever, and could emerge as a landmark court case in Delaware.

More than half the public shareholders in Endeavor—representing some 150 million shares according to a brief filed in April—are poised to challenge Silver Lake in Delaware Chancery Court. They’re seeking a higher price than the $27.50 in cash that was paid to investors when the deal closed on March 24.

It is rare for a sizable number of shareholders to participate in an appraisal process, which can take two years, because Delaware courts generally have been unwilling to second-guess a deal price. The filing rules are also complicated, and the process can be expensive.

But tech-investment firm Silver Lake, which controlled Endeavor, didn’t hold a shareholder vote by public holders on the transaction, leaving appraisal rights the only avenue for public investors who felt shortchanged by the deal.

Endeavor was headed by Hollywood superagent Ari Emanuel, who is now executive chairman of WME Group, which holds some of the company’s representation businesses, including what used to be the old William Morris talent agency. The now-private Endeavor’s most valuable asset by far is a majority stake in TKO Group Holdings, the owner of UFC (Ultimate Fighting Championship) and WWE (World Wrestling Entertainment).

Emanuel and other members of Endeavor’s top management participated with Silver Lake in taking the company private. Silver Lake owned nearly 40% of the company and management about 10% before the buyout, Barron’s estimates based on public disclosures.

There were a total of about 460 million shares outstanding.

Silver Lake issued a statement in early March amid speculation that it might boost the merger consideration. It stated the deal price was “appropriate and fair consideration to all Endeavor shareholders.”

Silver Lake noted the deal price amounted to a 55% premium to Endeavor’s stock price in October 2023 before Silver Lake announced its desire to make a proposal to take the company private. A Silver Lake spokesman said the firm has no further comment.

The dissenting shareholders could seek a price of $40 a share or more, based on the 65% rally in TKO shares from the deal announcement in April 2024 to the closing date in March.

If successful, holders could get appreciably more than the $40 a share because they stand to get interest paid at a 9% annual rate from the deal closing date until the court-ordered payment is made, based on Delaware law. That could mean a total potential payday for investors of over $6 billion.

In seeking appraisal rights, these holders opted to forego getting the $27.50 a share takeover price. A Delaware judge will decide what they will get—or effectively appraise the value of the company to determine fair value. It could be more or less than $27.50 a share.

The key date for valuation purposes is the closing date in March 2025, and not the date the deal was announced in April 2024, according to legal filings.

Currently, Silver Lake and Endeavor’s management stand to reap a gain of about $6 billion based on the run-up in TKO stock from the time the deal was set in April 2024 until closing in March. TKO stock now trades even higher at $159, up from about $150 in March. Silver Lake may have to share some of those spoils with the dissenting shareholders based on what the judge decides.

The value of TKO stock embedded in each Endeavor share was about $38 on March 24 when the deal closed, Barron’s estimates. Endeavor’s other assets could be worth several dollars a share net of debt, bringing the total value above $40 a share. With the bulk of the value in Endeavor consisting of TKO stock, it makes it easier for appraisal-rights seekers to make their argument for a higher payment than $27.50 a share since there is clear market value on TKO shares.

The dissenting shareholders include many firms that are active in arbitrage and special situations, including Pentwater Capital Management, AQR Capital Management, and Adage Capital Partners, according to the April filing. The largest public holder, and a participant in the appraisal process, is Troluce Capital Advisors, an investment firm headed by Jared Dubin. Troluce is estimated to own about 35 million shares in Endeavor.

Westchester Capital, which runs the $2.3 billion Merger Fund, is among those that plan to seek appraisal rights for its shares.

“My view is that it’s inevitable that Silver Lake and Ari Emanuel will have to pay more for our shares,” says Roy Behren, co-president and chief investment officer at Westchester Capital. “I see no possible scenario in which a judge will agree that $27.50 was a fair value as of the date the deal closed.”

Barron’s wrote about the Endeavor situation before the deal closed in March and predicted that many investors would seek to make use of the appraisal process.

It is possible that Silver Lake could try to settle with dissenting shareholders seeking appraisal rights before the trial. But the firm has held fast to the $27.50 takeover price. It wouldn’t boost its offer for Endeavor in the weeks before the deal closed—an action that could cause many investors to avoid taking the appraisal route. Endeavor stock traded as high as $35 in the weeks before the deal closed amid speculation about a higher bid by Silver Lake that never materialized.

Billionaire Carl Icahn’s investment vehicle, Icahn Enterprises (IEP), also popped up as a large shareholder just before the deal closed on March 24. IEP filed that it held 27.5 million of Endeavor on March 21 and then zero on March 24 when the deal closed.

This suggests Icahn didn’t qualify to file for appraisal rights because that deadline was in early February, or he chose not to. IEP hasn’t responded to a request for comment from Barron’s.

One looming issue is what law firm will be named lead counsel by the Delaware courts for the appraisal case. It could be a lucrative assignment given the potential payoff to investors.

A brief was filed in April in support of the lead counsel role jointly by two firms: Heyman, Enerio, Gattuso and Hirzel of Wilmington, Del., and Rolnick, Kramer and Sadighi of New York.

WSJ : OpenAI Sees New Opportunity for Devices in AI Revolution

OpenAI Sees New Opportunity for Devices in AI Revolution
Startup is working on devices that are ‘ambient’ and can detach people from screens, COO Brad Lightcap says

Key Points
  • OpenAI is exploring new AI devices to move beyond phone and web interfaces.
  • OpenAI’s enterprise customer base has expanded to three million, up from two million in February.
  • OpenAI is helping build an AI data center in Abu Dhabi, its first large-scale project outside the U.S.

OpenAI Chief Operating Officer Brad Lightcap said the AI revolution has ushered in an opportunity to create a new set of devices.

Lightcap, speaking at The Wall Street Journal’s Future of Everything event on Thursday, said that OpenAI is focused on building AI that is “truly personal.”

Right now, users access ChatGPT through web browsers and apps on a smartphone. OpenAI wants to build an “ambient computer layer” that can detach people from always having to be looking at a screen, he said. “There’s a lot that we have to do to develop models to succeed in that environment.”

Lightcap said he has “no idea” what device Chief Executive Sam Altman is working on with former Apple designer Jony Ive. The pair announced earlier this month that OpenAI is acquiring Ive’s company io in an all-equity deal that values it at $6.5 billion.

Ive, a chief architect of the iPhone, and his design firm are taking over creative and design control at OpenAI, where they will develop devices and other projects that will shape the future look and feel of AI, the Journal previously reported. Altman and Ive have taken pains to keep the exact nature of the first device they plan to make a secret.

In the interview, Lightcap also said that OpenAI’s enterprise customers have grown to three million, up from two million in February.

“We are growing quite fast in enterprise,” Lightcap said. He said the company is working with the California State University System and will make it available to about 500,000 students and faculty. He called it the “first AI-powered university system” in the country.

OpenAI also recently committed to helping build a giant artificial-intelligence data center in Abu Dhabi, marking its first large-scale project outside of the U.S. When asked about the choice of Abu Dhabi for a location, Lightcap emphasized that the U.A.E. is a “technology-forward” country. He said he was unsure of whether restrictions around political commentary in the U.A.E. will be applied to ChatGPT there.

TechCrunch : Perplexity’s new tool can generate spreadsheets, dashboards, and mo

Perplexity’s new tool can generate spreadsheets, dashboards, and more

Perplexity, the AI-powered search engine gunning for Google, on Thursday released Perplexity Labs, a tool for subscribers to Perplexity’s $20-per-month Pro plan that can craft reports, spreadsheets, dashboards, and more.

Perplexity Labs is available on the web, iOS, and Android, and coming soon to Perplexity’s apps for Mac and Windows.

“Perplexity Labs can help you complete a variety of work and personal projects,” Perplexity explains in a blog post. “Labs is designed to invest more time — 10 minutes or longer — and leverage additional tools [to accomplish tasks], such as advanced file generation and mini-app creation.”

Labs, which arrives the same day as viral AI agent platform Manus released a slide deck creation tool, is a part of Perplexity’s effort to broaden beyond its core business of search. Perplexity is currently previewing a web browser, Comet, and recently acquired Read.vc, a social media network for professionals.

Perplexity Labs
A Perplexity Labs dashboard

Perplexity Labs, powered by AI, can conduct research and analysis, taking around 10 minutes and using tools like web search, code execution, and chart and image creation to craft reports and visualizations. Labs can create interactive web apps, Perplexity says, and write code to structure data, apply formulas, and create documents.

All files created during a Perplexity Labs workflow — such as charts, images, and code files — are organized in a tab from where they can be viewed or downloaded. “This expanded capability empowers you to develop a broader array of deliverables for your projects,” according to Perplexity’s blog post.

It all sounds good in theory, but AI being an imperfect technology, Labs likely doesn’t always hit the mark. Of course, we’ll reserve judgment until we have a chance to test it.

Perplexity has increasingly invested in corporate-focused functionality, last summer launching an enterprise plan with user management, “internal knowledge search,” and more. The moves could be in part at the behest of the VCs backing Perplexity, who are no doubt eager to see a return sooner than later. Perplexity is reportedly in talks to raise up to $1 billion in capital from investors at an $18 billion valuation.

>>> US Close Dow +0.28% S&P +0.40% Nasdaq +0.39% Russell

Closing Stock Market Summary
NVIDIA (NVDA 139.18, +4.37, +3.2%) was primed to be the center of the stock market's attention today after it delivered some impressive quarterly results and guidance following yesterday's close. Market participants, though, were forced to divert their attention to a couple of legal rulings regarding the Trump administration's tariff measures and a spate of weaker-than-expected economic data that stirred some growth concerns.

Specifically, the U.S. Court of International Trade got things started with a ruling that President Trump does not have the legal authority to enforce reciprocal tariffs. The White House did not waste any time appealing that ruling, and it became known late in today's trade that the U.S. Court of Appeals granted the White House's request to temporarily reinstate the tariffs.

That ruling keeps the 10% global tariff, the 30% China tariff, and the 25% Canada/Mexico tariffs in place. The court gave the Trump administration until June 9 to respond. What both rulings did, though, was inject more uncertainty into the market that kept overall buying and selling efforts in check.

The same can be said for the second estimate for Q1 GDP, which showed a downward revision for personal spending; jobless claims data that showed the highest level for continuing jobless claims since November 13, 2021; and a 6.3% decline in pending home sales for April.

That collection of reports helped fuel a stark reversal in the Treasury market, which saw the 10-yr note yield and 30-yr bond yield hit 4.53% and 5.03%, respectively, in the overnight trade, with some deficit angst acting as a selling catalyst (the administration has been highlighting the collection of tariffs as a resource for paying down the national debt).

The 10-yr note yield settled today's session at 4.43%, while the 30-yr bond yield backed up to 4.93%, further fortified by a $44 billion 7-yr note auction that was met with strong demand. The U.S. Dollar Index was down 0.5% to 99.39 after being up 0.7% in the overnight trade.

The push lower in yields was not met with a concomitant surge in stock prices, given that growth concerns were behind much of the improvement in the Treasury market. Those concerns were augmented by Best Buy (BBY 66.32, -5.20, -7.3%) cutting its FY26 guidance and Dow component, Salesforce (CRM 266.92, -9.11, -3.3%), posting earnings results that were accompanied by a deceleration in growth for many of its core cloud segments.

Still, NVIDIA's results, and the AI growth optimism that followed them, offered some influential support for the broader market. The S&P 500 traded down to 5,873 at its worst level of the day, but buyers were quick to show up to help it regain a posture above the 5,900 level where it closed.

Ten of the 11 S&P 500 sectors were higher, but none were up more than 1.0%. The real estate sector (+0.9%) led that pack, but it was the information technology sector (+0.6%) that did the heavy lifting. The communication services sector (-0.3%) was the only sector to finish with a loss.

While today's gains were modest, breadth figures convey an otherwise positive bias. Advancers led decliners by a better than 2-to-1 margin at the NYSE and by a nearly 13-to-9 margin at the Nasdaq.
  • S&P 500: +0.5% YTD
  • Nasdaq: -0.7% YTD
  • DJIA: -0.8% YTD
  • S&P 400: -3.5% YTD
  • Russell 2000: -7.0% YTD

Reviewing today's data:
  • Initial jobless claims for the week ending May 24 increased by 16,000 to 240,000 (consensus 230,000), while continuing jobless claims for the week ending May 17 increased by 26,000 to 1.919 million, hitting their highest level since November 13, 2021.
    • The key takeaway from the report was the tandem jump in initial and continuing jobless claims, which denotes some increased layoff activity and some increased difficulty in finding a new job after being laid off.
  • The second estimate for the Q1 GDP report showed a 0.2% decline in real GDP (consensus -0.3%) versus the 0.3% decline reported in the advance estimate. The GDP Price Deflator was unrevised at 3.7% (consensus 3.7%) following a 2.3% increase in Q4.
    • The key takeaway from the report is that it featured a downward revision to personal spending to 1.2% from 1.8% in the advance estimate, underscoring how the tariff uncertainty and inflation angst tempered consumer spending activity.
  • April Pending Home Sales -6.3% (consensus -1.1%) versus downwardly revised 5.5% increase (from 6.1%) for March

>>> Elastic beats by $0.10, beats on revs; guides Q1 EPS in-line, revs above con

Elastic beats by $0.10, beats on revs; guides Q1 EPS in-line, revs above consensus; guides FY26 EPS above consensus, revs below consensus
  • Reports Q4 (Apr) earnings of $0.47 per share, excluding non-recurring items, $0.10 better than the FactSet Consensus of $0.37; revenues rose 15.9% year/year to $388.4 mln vs the $380.36 mln FactSet Consensus.
  • Elastic Cloud revenue was $182 million, an increase of 23% year-over-year, as reported and on a constant currency basis.
  • Total customer count with Annual Contract Value (ACV) greater than $100,000 was over 1,510 compared to over 1,460 in Q3 FY25, and over 1,330 in Q4 FY24.
  • Co issues guidance for Q1, sees EPS of $0.41-$0.43, excluding non-recurring items, vs. $0.42 FactSet Consensus; sees Q1 revs of $396-$398 mln vs. $395.07 mln FactSet Consensus.
  • Co issues mixed guidance for FY26, sees EPS of $2.24-$2.32 vs. $2.09 FactSet Consensus; sees FY26 revs of $1.655-$1.670 bln vs. $1.68 bln FactSet Consensus

>>> Dell misses by $0.15, reports revs in-line; guides Q2 EPS above consensus, r

Dell misses by $0.15, reports revs in-line; guides Q2 EPS above consensus, revs above consensus; guides FY26 EPS above consensus, revs in-line
  • Reports Q1 (Apr) earnings of $1.55 per share, excluding non-recurring items, $0.15 worse than the FactSet Consensus of $1.70; revenues rose 5.1% year/year to $23.38 bln vs the $23.18 bln FactSet Consensus.
    • Infrastructure Solutions Group (ISG) Revenue: $10.3 bln, up 12% yr/yr.
      • Servers and Networking revenue rose 16% to a Q1 record $6.3 bln.
      • Storage revenue rose 6% to $4.0 bln.
    • Client Solutions Group (CSG) revenue rose 5% yr/yr to $12.5 bln.
      • Commercial Client revenue: $11.0 billion, up 9%.
      • Consumer revenue: $1.5 billion, down 19%.
  • Co issues upside guidance for Q2 (Jul), sees EPS of $2.25, excluding non-recurring items, vs. $2.11 FactSet Consensus; sees Q2 revs of $28.50-29.50 bln vs. $25.33 bln FactSet Consensus.
  • Co issues guidance for FY26, sees EPS of $9.40, excluding non-recurring items, vs. $9.21 FactSet Consensus; sees FY26 revs of $101-105 bln vs. $103.11 bln FactSet Consensus.

>>> Ambarella beats by $0.03, beats on revs; guides Q2 revs above consensus (62.

Ambarella beats by $0.03, beats on revs; guides Q2 revs above consensus
  • Reports Q1 (Apr) earnings of $0.07 per share, excluding non-recurring items, $0.03 better than the FactSet Consensus of $0.04; revenues rose 57.7% year/year to $85.9 mln vs the $84 mln FactSet Consensus.
  • Co issues upside guidance for Q2, sees Q2 revs of $86.0-$94.0 mln vs. $84.68 mln FactSet Consensus. Gross margin on a non-GAAP basis is expected to be between 60.5% and 62.0%.
  • Stock Repurchase: During the second quarter of fiscal year 2026, Ambarella's Board of Directors approved an extension of the current share repurchase program for an additional twelve months ending June 30, 2026. In the first quarter of fiscal year 2026, the company repurchased a total of 24,152 shares for total consideration of approximately $1.0 million. As of today, there is approximately $48.0 million available for repurchase under the company's stock repurchase program.

The Information : Apple’s Satellite Ambitions Threatened by Elon Musk, Internal

Apple’s Satellite Ambitions Threatened by Elon Musk, Internal Resistance
For years, concerns about ticking off wireless carriers have forced Apple executives to scale back plans to keep iPhones connected through satellites. Now Apple’s space efforts have a new problem: Elon Musk.

Three years ago, Elon Musk approached Apple with an eleventh-hour offer.

Musk had heard that Apple was about to announce a feature for the upcoming iPhone 14 in partnership with satellite firm Globalstar that would allow iPhones to send text messages to emergency services in areas without cellular reception. He wanted Apple to instead use satellite internet service from Starlink, a Globalstar rival operated by Musk’s rocket company, SpaceX.

His pitch: SpaceX would agree to exclusively provide satellite connectivity to iPhones for 18 months if Apple would pay it $5 billion up front, according to two people with direct knowledge of the deal. After that period of exclusivity ended, Musk proposed that Apple pay SpaceX $1 billion a year for Starlink service, the people said. Furthermore, if Apple couldn’t come to terms with SpaceX, Musk threatened to announce a similar satellite feature on his own that could work with iPhones, the people added. He gave Apple 72 hours to decide.

The Takeaway
• In 2022, Musk made an offer to Apple to provide satellite connectivity to iPhones via Starlink
• He proposed Apple pay SpaceX $5 billion for an 18-month exclusive deal
•Apple’s Project Eagle was an early plan with Boeing to offer full mobile and home internet service via satellite
Apple rejected the offer from Musk, who later made good on his threat. Two weeks before the iPhone 14 was announced, SpaceX in August 2022 announced a partnership with phone carrier T-Mobile, which allowed smartphone users to send and receive text messages in areas with no reception using Starlink.

The failed deal added tension to Apple’s relationship with Musk, who has spent the ensuing years tangling with the iPhone maker on a range of issues, including the burden its App Store fees put on his X social media service. Musk has even flirted with making his own phone to reduce his dependence on Apple.

The headbutting is especially intense over the issue of satellite internet service, which by some estimates represents the most lucrative part of SpaceX’s business and the majority of its $350 billion valuation. SpaceX has filed legal challenges to Globalstar’s use of the radio spectrum it has licensed, which could cripple the iPhone’s satellite service if successful.

“In this space, SpaceX only thinks about Apple as a serious competitor and Apple only thinks about SpaceX as a serious competitor,” said Tim Farrar, president at satellite consulting firm Telecom, Media & Finance Associates.

For Apple, satellite internet service is still a sideshow to its gargantuan iPhone business, which accounted for 51% of the company’s $391 billion in revenues last year. However, keeping iPhones connected when cellular networks aren’t available could become an increasingly important part of the value of smartphones. Apple’s satellite features are now available in 17 countries and have expanded beyond emergency texting to include location sharing and messages to personal contacts and roadside assistance.

But those efforts have been divisive even inside Apple itself. The satellite project as a whole has faced growing skepticism from Apple executives who worry the company is moving too far into the realm of becoming a telecommunications carrier, which could expose it to additional regulation. Also, Apple counts on mobile carriers to push sales of its latest iPhones. These carriers, who strike their own partnerships with satellite providers, could view Apple’s project as their competition.

In a statement, an Apple spokesperson said: “When no carrier network is available, Apple offers its own satellite services focused on emergency services—like messaging, emergency assistance, roadside help, and location sharing—which have already helped save lives. Our features have been designed to complement carrier offerings, giving users an added safety net when carrier service is unavailable.”

SpaceX didn’t respond to a request for comment.

Project Eagle

Apple’s original space ambitions were vast.

Starting in 2015, Apple and Boeing held early discussions about a satellite internet project that would involve delivering full-blown wireless internet service, not just emergency communications services, to iPhones and homes, said five people involved in or briefed on the project.

Through the effort, dubbed Project Eagle within Apple, the companies would lob thousands of Boeing satellites into orbit to beam internet down to iPhones. For home users, Apple planned to offer antennas people could stick to their windows to disperse their internet connection throughout the building. (Satellite internet requires a device to have an uninterrupted line of sight to the sky.)

For the project’s champions, it was an ambitious gambit to provide a more seamless Apple experience. Some inside Apple saw mobile carriers as necessary but inconvenient partners that held the company’s iPhone plans back. With a global satellite system, Apple could provide more of the key ingredients for its products, reducing its dependency on outside partners.

The lead executive and architect behind the project was Apple’s longtime wireless chief, Rubén Caballero. Apple spent around $36 million testing out the concept at a secret location in El Segundo, Calif., the people with knowledge of the project said. The team aimed to launch the service in 2019.

But eventually Apple got cold feet. Tim Cook, Apple’s CEO, was concerned that the project would jeopardize the company’s relationship with the telecom industry, said people with direct knowledge of the project. It was also an expensive undertaking with an unclear near-term business case. At the end of 2016, Apple canceled the project. (Caballero left the company in 2019.)

Still, Apple’s satellite dreams didn’t die with Project Eagle.

Apple’s former hardware engineering chief, Dan Riccio, formed a group that began looking at new wireless opportunities the company could go after to differentiate its products.

The effort was consistent with other moves Apple was taking at the time to control more of the wireless technologies that connected its products to the internet. The company was locked in a bitter courtroom brawl with Qualcomm over the fees the wireless chipmaker was demanding for its patents, prompting Apple to start developing its own wireless modem chips.

In 2018, Apple had casual conversations with satellite internet provider OneWeb and other satellite internet providers about investing in them to deliver home internet service from satellites, said people with direct knowledge of the talks. OneWeb told Apple such a service would cost between $30 billion and $40 billion to deploy, one of the people said.

But the conversations between Apple and OneWeb quickly fizzled. OneWeb was struggling financially (in 2020, the company filed for bankruptcy after it failed to raise enough money). And eventually the Apple skunkworks team came to a conclusion similar to the one their colleagues working on Project Eagle had reached a couple years earlier: Apple shouldn’t get into the home internet business.

Differentiating from Android

Next, the group came up with a focus that seemed to present less potential for conflict with its existing carrier relationships: figuring out how to deliver satellite communications to iPhones only in remote areas that weren’t already served by terrestrial cellular networks.

The team looked at partnering with satellite providers such as EchoStar, but deals with those companies were too expensive for Apple, said people with direct knowledge of the talks.

Apple’s head of corporate development, Adrian Perica, encouraged the team to work with SpaceX as its satellite provider, said people who worked on the project. Perica had dealings with Musk that stretched back over a decade, to when Apple looked into acquiring Tesla. The two had maintained a relationship since then, keeping in touch via text messages, said the people.

But ultimately, Apple ended up cutting a deal with Globalstar. Apple was able to get a good deal, as the satellite provider was facing financial difficulties at the time, said people who worked on the deal.

In 2022, Apple announced a $450 million investment in U.S. infrastructure, with the bulk of the funding allocated to Globalstar to support its satellite network and ground station operations. In 2024, Apple committed an additional $1.7 billion to Globalstar, including $1.1 billion for the construction and launch of new satellites.

Within a team at Apple that deals with government regulators, the structure of the Globalstar deal caused some hand-wringing. At one point, Apple owned some of the equipment, including servers and antennas in Globalstar’s ground stations. Apple’s regulatory advisers recommended having Globalstar take ownership of it to avoid running afoul of telecommunications rules, one person with direct knowledge of the matter said.

When Apple launched the emergency satellite texting feature in 2022, it turned out to be the standout feature for that generation of iPhones, distinguishing the devices from rival Android ones.

The satellite team hoped to make an even bigger bet on satellites. In 2023, the team began pushing Apple leaders to use a new generation of satellites to deliver unrestricted internet service to phones in remote locations, including applications like streaming music and video, said people with direct knowledge of the project. It would have been much more expensive than Globalstar’s existing service for Apple, consisting of a couple hundred satellites rather than Globalstar’s current constellation of several dozen.

But once again Apple backed away from those plans out of concerns that such a move would anger mobile carriers. Instead, the company decided to limit its satellite offering mostly to messaging and potentially less data-intensive applications like accessing maps.

Rival Musk

After Apple spurned Musk’s offer of a Starlink deal in 2022, SpaceX began a campaign to make life harder for Apple in the satellite business. SpaceX filed multiple challenges to the valuable wireless spectrum rights licensed to Globalstar in filings to the Federal Communications Commission.

In one of those filings in 2023, SpaceX’s vice president of satellite policy, David Goldman, objected to Globalstar’s application to launch new satellites, accusing the satellite company of barely using the spectrum it already controlled. Goldman accused the company of trying to lock out rivals by hogging spectrum for itself.

“This shell game serves one purpose: to block competitive entry in frequencies Globalstar has never meaningfully used,” Goldman wrote.

SpaceX also named Apple in the regulatory filings, vexing Apple executives who wanted to keep their distance from the spat between SpaceX and Globalstar, said people with direct knowledge of the matter.

After SpaceX name-checked it in the filing, Apple executives ramped up their attention to the spectrum issue. Earlier this year, Apple hired Whitney Lohmeyer, former chief technologist of the Space Bureau at the FCC, to deal with the flurry of regulatory filings with the agency, said people with direct knowledge of her hire. Apple employees believe Musk’s close relationship with Trump could give him an advantage over Apple and others with the FCC.

More recently, Apple and SpaceX have clashed over how much Apple would support SpaceX’s partnership with T-Mobile. Over the past year, Musk asked Apple to support the T-Mobile satellite feature in a broad range of its iPhone models, which will help maximize the potential market for the service, said people involved in the project.

But Apple was reluctant to support the service in models older than the iPhone 14, which frustrated Musk, said people with direct knowledge of the relationship. Apple’s stance could provide an incentive for its customers to upgrade their phones to newer models. The launch of SpaceX’s offering to T-Mobile customers, currently available in a beta version and due to fully launch in July, could also undercut Apple’s service with Globalstar since iPhones on T-Mobile’s network will default to the Starlink service.

In recent years, Musk has also plotted the ultimate challenge to Apple, said a person with direct knowledge of his thinking: building his own phone to get around Apple’s gatekeeper position in the market. Musk has discussed Tesla building the phone and providing satellite connectivity through Starlink, the person said.

Musk hasn’t kept his openness to making a smartphone secret. He has publicly toyed with the idea on social media at times, but he has also made it clear he doesn’t want to deal with the headaches of such a monumental effort.

“The idea of making a phone makes me want to die,” Musk said at a Trump rally in Philadelphia last October. “If we have to make a phone, we will. But we will aspire not to make a phone.”

Internal Doubts

Some employees and senior executives at Apple have questioned the long-term viability of the iPhone’s satellite service.

Former Apple employees who have worked on the project say the network Globalstar is operating for Apple is already outdated, slow and limited in what features it can support compared with offerings from SpaceX and others. And the satellites Globalstar plans to launch for Apple in the coming years, which won’t significantly upgrade that network, are expected to stay in place through the next decade, they say.

Apple has yet to begin charging users for satellite features and has extended the free access period through at least September of this year.

One reason Apple executives have been reluctant to charge customers for the features is their fear that it could trigger the U.S. government to regulate Apple as a telecommunications carrier, said people who worked on the project. That could force Apple to build back doors into communication services like iMessage. Federal law requires telecommunication carriers to allow for surveillance to comply with government information requests.

One person who worked on Apple’s satellite network estimated that the company is spending hundreds of millions of dollars annually on the service. That includes payments to Globalstar, equipment costs to run the network and salaries for engineers.

Other top Apple executives, including software chief Craig Federighi, have at times advocated that the project should be killed off. Those skeptics argue that customers are more likely to sign up for satellite features through their mobile carriers, rendering Apple’s offering unnecessary.

Perica, who initially advocated for a partnership with SpaceX, is now among those Apple executives who are dismissive of the satellite project. According to a person who has heard his remarks, Perica has raised the question inside Apple of why the company should invest in the effort if Musk is going to do it anyway.

The Information : VC Funds Are for Sale—at a Discount

VC Funds Are for Sale—at a Discount

The Takeaway
• Nokia pension plan sells VC fund stakes
• Lee Fixel’s family office sells dozens of early-stage fund stakes
• Buyers hunt for fund stakes at steep discounts

The year 2025 was supposed to bring a cash windfall to venture capital backers, as companies that had delayed going public finally made the leap.

That hasn’t happened. With a roller-coaster stock market delaying many long-anticipated initial public offerings, the limited partners in VC funds have been finding new ways to cash out of their stakes in private tech firms. Some are selling their ownership of VC funds. The VC funds in turn have been putting their own startup stakes up for sale. That means ownership of hot startups like Stripe and Databricks are sometimes up for grabs.

Earlier this year, telecommunications equipment maker Nokia told some U.S. VC funds that one of its pension plans was selling its stakes in those funds, unloading positions worth at least several hundreds of millions of dollars, according to a person involved in the discussions. Lexington Partners, a New York investment firm that specializes in buying VC funds and startup stakes from other investors, bought some of those stakes. Nokia and Lexington Partners declined to comment.

“A lot of [limited partners] came into 2025 hoping for a functioning IPO window and productive M&A markets,” said Brian Borton, managing partner at StepStone Group, a New York–based investment firm. “But with the recent volatility, hopes have been dashed.”

StepStone’s VC team in the last few weeks has been evaluating six portfolios, worth more than $2.5 billion altogether, in VC funds that are up for sale. The size of portfolios ranged from $200 million to $700 million each, he said.

Deals of this size and number have been “limited to nonexistent” in recent years, he said. If there were deals, they would have been “one-off in nature and typically smaller.”

For decades, VC’s limited partners could rely on funds to return their cash once the funds reached the seven- to ten-year mark and the startups they backed went public or sold. In the last three years, that largely hasn’t happened, thanks to the dearth of IPOs.

Instead, funds raised just before or during the pandemic have invested billions of dollars in startups that have since lost value. And these startups usually don’t have any chance of going public soon.

“Everyone felt rich in 2021, and now they’ve overcommitted to long-term illiquid assets,” said Ben Black of Akkadian Ventures, a San Francisco–based venture firm that buys stakes in growth-stage startups from other investors. “They made their commitments when times were great but now…there’s very little distribution.”

The pressure has forced both VC funds and their limited partners to seek other ways to find cash. Global secondary transactions, which include sales of stakes in private startups and venture funds, rose 45% last year to a record $162 billion, topping a 2021 high, according to data from Jefferies, an investment bank that acts as an adviser to secondary buyers and sellers.

In one of the most notable examples of its kind, Yale University hired advisory firm Evercore to help the university sell billions of dollars in private equity fund investments from its $41 billion endowment.

Nassau Financial Group, a Connecticut-based financial services firm with roughly $25 billion in assets under management, has hired VO2 Partners, an asset management and advisory firm, to assist in managing its venture portfolio, including potentially exploring sales of its stakes, according to Laurence Levi, a partner at VO2 Partners.

Collectively, limited partners sold $87 billion in fund stakes last year, up 45% from the prior year, according to Jefferies.


These institutions and wealthy individuals are looking to sell their fund stakes as cash distributions—usually generated when a startup goes public or sells to another company—have fallen to historic lows. That makes it hard for endowments to meet their own distribution needs, such as assisting with tuition and funding research, and for pensions to make payments to their members.

Bill Coaker, chief investment officer of family office Decas Capital and former chief investment officer of the San Francisco Employees’ Retirement System, said five out of seven VC funds he met with this year have had “low to zero DPI,” the distributed to paid-in capital ratio that measures the cash VC firms have returned to investors. These funds were at least five years old, a point at which they typically make some cash distributions.

Family offices, the firms set up to manage wealthy individuals’ money, are also shedding some investments in VC funds.

Last year, the family office of Lee Fixel, founder of VC firm Addition, sold dozens of stakes in early-stage funds, according to a person familiar with the sale. Some sold at a discount of more than 50% of their value, according to the person.

VC funds, for their part, have been more aggressively pruning their stock portfolios to return cash to investors. Sales initiated by VC firms’ general partners jumped to $75 billion last year, up 44% from the year prior, according to Jefferies.

Firms such as Insight Partners and Lightspeed Venture Partners have set up continuation funds, which allow limited partners in a venture fund to sell startup stakes to other limited partners, who become part of the new investment vehicle.

Some VC funds are engaging in strip sales, or selling a slice of a fund’s stake in a collection of companies. Basis Set Ventures, a San Francisco, Calif.–based early-stage venture firm, last fall sold part of its first, $136 million fund in a strip sale after one of its limited partners approached founder Lan Xuezhao.

Xuezhao initially hesitated, but she realized the sale would help the seven-year-old fund deliver cash returns back to her limited partners.

As a result of the sale, the fund’s realized value was roughly five times the invested capital.

“Psychologically, I feel good giving cash back. I sleep better, I can make decisions differently knowing that I returned cash,” she said.

Interest from VC funds in selling startup ownership has been so high that StepStone created educational materials and webinars for general partners to explore liquidity options such as strip sales and continuation funds about 18 months ago. The firm also offers software tools enabling the funds to analyze their DPI against those of their peers and against benchmarks.

Buyer’s Market
The demand has created a bonanza for specialty funds that hunt for exposure to startup stakes on the cheap, sometimes at a discount of as much as 50% to the net asset value—the value of the underlying portfolio companies.

These VC secondary funds look to make two to three times the cost of their investment, or net annualized returns between 20% and 35%, with the goal of getting money back within four to five years, said Borton.

There are so many would-be sellers that some transactions fizzle, say investors.

Menlo Park, Calif.,–based venture firm IVP last year explored selling some assets in one of its funds, including stakes in Klarna and Dataminr. But the sale didn’t happen after IVP and potential buyers of the assets couldn’t agree on price and structure, according to a person familiar with the process.

The collapse in tech stocks after the Trump administration announced deep tariff hikes in late March has also stymied some deals after prices dropped for sellers. But some buyers expect more deals to happen as limited partners accept discounts.

Discounts for stakes in VC funds are getting bigger, said Hans Swildens, CEO and founder of Industry Ventures, which invested roughly $1 billion last year, including buying two portfolios from corporations’ VC arms.

He said that’s because with so few IPOs in the pipeline, limited partners are wondering, “How long are you going to hold these assets?”