TheChek News Flow

Sun Microsystems co-founder Vinod Khosla has struck a deal to pay $9.6 billion for the reigning Super Bowl champions

When Vinod Khosla co-founded Sun Microsystems, he had little sense that he would go on to revolutionize computing. Later, he joined a venture-capital firm as a partner where he struck deals worth billions. And on his personal investing front, he was among the first to pour money into OpenAI.

That history of success gave Khosla the confidence to make another eye-popping acquisition: the reigning Super Bowl champions.

Khosla, 71, and his family have agreed to pay $9.6 billion to buy the Seattle Seahawks, a record price for the controlling stake of an NFL franchise. The number shatters the previous high-water mark that was set when a group led by private-equity titan Joshua Harris bought the Washington Commanders for $6 billion.

The future of the Seahawks had been in flux since the 2018 death of Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen, who purchased the team in 1997. In his absence, the team has been held by a trust controlled by Allen’s sister, Jody Allen, with a mandate that the team eventually be sold. That arrangement ran afoul of the NFL’s governance rules—and the league had been pressuring Jody Allen to follow through with a sale.

Interest in the team was expected to be high given the NFL’s financial success and how rarely teams hit the market. The Seahawks’ status as Super Bowl champions only raised their profile. Barely a week after they hoisted the Lombardi Trophy, the Allen estate announced that the team was up for sale.

The asset was widely seen as attractive to the tech crowd, given the small number of teams based on the West Coast.

“We are honored to be entrusted as the next stewards of the Seattle Seahawks,” he said. “We look forward to building on the winning legacy Paul Allen created and to earning the trust of the Seahawks organization and fans everywhere.”

Khosla was born in India and came to the U.S. in his 20s, when he received a business degree from Stanford. From a young age, he showed an entrepreneurial spirit. His first venture, before moving stateside, was trying to create a soy milk company back in his home country.

Khosla translated his success with Sun Microsystems into a career as an investor. Khosla Ventures, founded in 2004, has been an investor in numerous companies that have grown into household names including DoorDash and Instacart.

And long before ChatGPT became ubiquitous, Khosla was plowing money into the experimental technology. His venture firm was the first to invest in OpenAI when it committed $50 million in 2019.

“To do something exceptional, you have to do something out of the ordinary,” Khosla has said. “And that usually means risk.”

Khosla’s latest purchase comes with a much heftier price tag. But the $9.6 billion isn’t entirely out of step with other valuations across all sports. Previously, minority stakes in NFL teams have been sold at valuations in excess of $10 billion.

Khosla is also no stranger to the NFL. Last year, his family became a minority owner in the San Francisco 49ers, a division rival of the Seahawks, and will be required to divest. According to an NFL memo sent to teams, Vinod’s wife Neeru Khosla would serve as Seattle’s controlling owner if and when the purchase is approved by the league.

“Excited to be part of this great franchise,” Vinod wrote on social media.

The ‘Do Not Buy’ season is upon us, but the global memory-chip crunch complicates our expectations around Apple’s fall hardware lineup

Summer is usually the worst time to buy an iPhone. This year, because of the global memory-chip shortage, it’s more complicated. In fact, some iPhones are safe bets right now.

Apple unveils new phones and other hardware each fall. Usually, by holding off upgrades until then, you get a new device with a longer shelf life or, at the very least, the price drops on last year’s models.

But analysts expect high-end iPhones will cost more this September, and the lower-priced models won’t be refreshed until 2027. Apple already raised prices on the MacBook Air, Pro and Neo, as well as iPad Air and Pro models. So now we have to ask, how much more will the upcoming iPhone Pro models cost? And what about the rumored folding iPhone?

While Apple doesn’t comment on future products, my colleagues have reported an iPhone with a flexible, folding display is coming. And we expect Apple Watch, iPad and Mac updates, too. What is OK to buy at this time? Here are the products that get my green, red and—most important—yellow lights.

iPhone: Proceed with caution

If you need an upgrade, now is the time to figure out which iPhone to buy. There’s the basic model, the no-frills “e” series, the Pro, the Air and, this year, the foldable.

Francisco Jeronimo, vice president of client devices at IDC, says Apple might not launch the next-generation base iPhone or superthin Air until the following spring—with a $100 markup.

A staggered release would allow Apple to spread its manufacturing and memory-chip demands throughout the year, says Lexuan Chiew, research manager at Omdia.

You might not even save on the iPhone 17 if you wait. Bob O’Brien, a director at Counterpoint Research, believes Apple will continue offering it at its current $799 starting price, even after a pricier iPhone 18 launches.

Don’t need bells and whistles? Just go and get the iPhone 17 or more affordable 17e.

This September’s event focuses on the Pro and the new folding models, according to analysts, so it’s now a bad time to buy a Pro.

The 18 Pro will likely have a starting price tag $200 higher than last year’s model, Jeronimo says. That’s in line with our calculations based on projections from the research firm TechInsights.

If you can’t stomach the price hike but care about Pro-level cameras and battery, you could check out older, refurbished devices. Note: You can get most of Apple’s AI features on an iPhone 15 Pro or 16 Pro, but you’ll need at least a 17 Pro for the most advanced on-device features coming soon.

The folding iPhone will cost even more—around $2,500, Jeronimo says. Like the Samsung and Google Pixel foldables, this all-new model will have a standard screen on the outside, and open like a book to reveal a bigger screen within.

Other Apple products

The fall is also when we see new Apple Watches, as well as a smattering of AirPods, iPads and Macs. Here’s what to expect:

AirPods: OK to buy all models. We aren’t expecting new ones this year.

The Pros were refreshed with better noise canceling and battery life just last year, and the over-ear AirPods Max 2 came out in March. Although the regular AirPods got their last upgrade in late 2024 with noise cancellation, the release cadence tends to be 2½ to 3 years.

Apple Watch: Do not buy. New models incoming.

The Apple Watch Series 12 and Ultra 4 are imminent, says Counterpoint Research associate director David Naranjo. It won’t be a major hardware upgrade, he says, but a new processor should mean faster performance, battery gains and added AI features.

iPad: Pros are OK to buy. Wait for other models.

iPad Pros got the latest M5 chip last October, and the iPad Air got a chip bump in March. Meanwhile, the iPad Mini got a modest refresh in October 2024. A new Mini with a vibrant, energy-efficient OLED display might appear this year, says Naranjo, citing sources in the supply chain.

Mac: MacBooks are OK to buy. Wait for desktop Macs, which need an upgrade.

The latest MacBook Air and Neo came out this year. Apple also announced chip bumps to the higher-end Pro models (though not the base 14-inch Pro).

It has been longer since Apple updated its desktop models, the Mac Studio, Mac Mini and iMac. And the rise of AI agents led to such a Mac Mini and Mac Studio buying frenzy that Apple has struggled to keep up.

HomePod: Do not buy.

The current HomePods came out years ago. With a smarter, more personalized Siri AI rolling out in beta to English-language users later this year, it’s natural to assume the revamped assistant will come to revamped speakers.

It might not be this fall, says Jeronimo: “I’m not sure whether Siri is ready for a HomePod experience.” But it’s worth holding out for a compatible speaker, especially if the new Siri proves itself worthy.

Abivax race — the field (scorecard attached), a rising price tag, and why AZN can’t be ruled out

Following on the AZN read-across: Soriot’s FT interview lays out the exact demand backdrop — “nearly $20bn of sales” going generic after 2030 and only “halfway to a target of launching 20 new medicines by 2030” — that keeps AstraZeneca in the frame for a de-risked immunology asset. But AZN is the outsider here, not the favourite, and the price to play just went up. I’ve put the full buyer field in the attached one-page scorecard (strategic fit vs. ability to fund a ~$20bn+ take-out, ranked most-to-least likely).

Abivax has been a named takeover target since JPM in January, when Eli Lilly was reported to be eyeing a ~€15bn ($17.5bn) deal. The tension across the field is that the best strategic fits and the deepest pockets aren’t the same names:

The €15bn/$17.5bn January number now looks like a floor for three compounding reasons: obefazimod’s Phase 3 maintenance data landed positive; the mid-year cancer-signal scare (stock -43% in early June) was largely walked back by end-June safety data (+36%); and — critically — Abivax just raised ~$920M to fund a solo US launch with runway to ~2029. That raise does two things to any bid: it adds cash to the equity bridge, and it removes the distressed-seller dynamic entirely. A buyer now has to pay a control premium over a company that has credibly said it doesn’t need one. Net effect: the realistic take-out has drifted from ~$17.5bn toward $20bn+.

What makes obefazimod expensive is a rare combination: genuinely first-in-class mechanism (oral miR-124 enhancer), Phase 3 de-risked, in a market as big as UC + Crohn’s (IBD heading for ~$27–31bn by 2030). The right precedents are the recent novel-mechanism IBD takeouts, not oncology:

Those two set the going rate for a de-risked, new-mechanism IBD asset at roughly $7–11bn — and both were injectable antibodies still short of full Phase 3. Abivax, at a rumored ~$17.5bn-and-rising, is being marked above that band, consistent with obefazimod being (a) oral rather than injectable and (b) further along. The TL1A comps don’t undercut the price — they frame why it’s higher.

Scanning for still-independent immunology assets with a comparable “novel MoA + late-stage + large TAM” profile, there aren’t many, and each is an imperfect match:

Bottom line: within immunology specifically, first-in-class + Phase 3 + IBD-scale TAM is genuinely scarce. The market has been paying $7–11bn for novel-target IBD antibodies (TL1A); Abivax pairs a novel mechanism with an oral profile in the same disease, which is exactly why its number sits above the precedents — and why any buyer, AZN included, has to stretch.

Full buyer-by-buyer ratings are in the attached scorecard (Abivax_Buyer_Scorecard.docx). Happy to firm up the exact net-debt/EBITDA per name before this goes further.

Best,

Laurent

Even a chatbot trained on nutrition and fitness research that dispenses reasonable-sounding guidance can become a deadly influence

• Eating-disorder therapists say patients are increasingly using chatbots for diet and exercise advice, sometimes challenging professional guidance.
• Therapists warn that chatbot advice delivered without clinical context can be dangerous and delay vital treatment for eating disorders.
• AI companies say they are working to improve how their models recognize and respond to signs of disordered eating.

Eating-disorder therapists are getting fed up when patients turn to chatbots for advice.

Women and men are uploading photos of themselves to artificial-intelligence bots, asking for tips on how to lose weight or bulk up on muscle. Some list what they’re eating and ask how they could eat better, sometimes getting dangerous responses about cutting out too much fat and carbs. Others prompt their chatbots to produce ultralow-calorie meal plans or excessive fitness routines.

While advice on diet and exercise could be helpful to some users, it can be harmful to someone with an eating disorder. Trying to countermand the chatbot’s advice takes valuable time and effort away from treatment, therapists say.

It’s getting so bad that some say patients are even challenging them during therapy sessions.

“I’ve had patients hold up their phone and use their mic to ask ChatGPT what was wrong with what I just said,” says Dr. Anne O’Melia, chief clinical and quality officer of the Eating Recovery Center, which provides treatment in several states. “Half my patients are fact-checking me daily.”

While chatbots are the new Dr. Google for a lot of people seeking medical advice, eating-disorder therapists say advice offered to their patients without the context of their diagnoses is downright dangerous. Eating disorders have the second-highest mortality rate of any psychiatric illness, behind opioid addiction.

Chatbot advice also differs from that found on social media, which has already been linked to the development of eating disorders among teens. “This is one-on-one engagement,” O’Melia says. “Chatbots learn what you like to hear and are programmed to agree with you.”

With eating disorders, patients often believe that extreme exercise or bingeing and purging are helping them cope with problems such as anxiety or depression, says Allie Weiser, director of helpline services for the National Alliance for Eating Disorders.

Therapists are now spending a lot of time trying to convince their patients that their guidance is based on clinical evidence, while chatbots might synthesize advice from general nutritional or fitness sources intended for those without eating disorders, or pull information from unreliable sources.

AI companies say they’re working to improve the way their chatbots recognize and respond to signs of eating disorders, and bots now refer patients to professionals more often.

OpenAI continues to use input from clinicians and real use cases to refine its eating-disorder policies and safeguards, a company spokeswoman says. OpenAI pointed to independent research, which found that GPT-5.4, the model that previously powered ChatGPT, consistently recognized eating disorders and recommended evidence-based treatment.

An Anthropic spokesman says its Claude chatbot models have classifiers designed to recognize signs of disordered eating. When that happens, he says, Claude avoids providing information that could encourage or reinforce harmful patterns (calorie counts, weight-loss guidance, etc.). Earlier this year Anthropic introduced a new evaluation dedicated to disordered eating. Its latest models, Opus 4.8 and Fable 5, scored 99.8% and 99.7%, respectively, on identifying potential risks in prompts.

A Google spokeswoman says Gemini encourages people to consult with medical professionals. “We’re continuously working to improve the safety and accuracy of our models,” the spokeswoman said in a statement.

Correcting chatbot misinformation can delay vital treatment, says Hannah Lindsey, a therapist in Louisville, Ky. “When a patient says a chatbot told her to go to the gym five times a week and all she eats is oatmeal,” she says, “I have to put the trauma processing to the side and address the meal plan that’s not appropriate.”

But training AI to know when and how to offer advice to those struggling with disordered eating has proven difficult. When leading experts tried to offer their own chatbot to help those at risk, it dispensed problematic advice. In 2023, a bot on the website for the National Eating Disorders Association offered unapproved weight-loss tips. It turned out the bot was programmed with generative AI without the nonprofit’s knowledge. It was taken offline. Chief Executive Jessica Scheer says NEDA has no plans to bring back a chatbot.

Downsides and upsides

Even when therapists break through to their patients, the patients often fall back to the always-available chatbot once they’re outside the doctor’s office. Therapists acknowledge that chatbots can provide support for people when a therapist isn’t necessarily available, such as between visits. People who don’t see therapists also now turn to chatbots.

“We know that upward of 70% of people with eating disorders will never get access to care,” says Johanna Kandel, CEO of the National Alliance for Eating Disorders. “The positive part of AI is that it’s pushing a lot of people to call our helpline directly”—one staffed by licensed human therapists.

Last month, 7.6% of calls to the helpline originated from ChatGPT and other AI platforms, up from less than half a percent a year ago.

Kandel says the uptick in referrals suggests chatbots are getting better at detecting signs of disordered eating. But such disorders are complex, and people don’t usually disclose them to their chatbot. When an AI model is dispensing advice, it doesn’t know the difference between a body builder who wants to lift heavier weights and is consuming enough protein and a malnourished person who isn’t.

When an AI model is dispensing advice, it doesn’t know the difference between a body builder who wants to lift heavier weights and is consuming enough protein and a malnourished person who isn’t.

“I really feel like AI platforms have an opportunity here to learn from what happened with social media and eating disorders, and to do better,” Kandel says.

Michigan contest will measure how far left the party is willing to go in the industrial heartland and beyond

GRAND RAPIDS, Mich.—To hear establishment Democrats tell it, Republicans are as excited as progressives about the prospect of Abdul El-Sayed winning a pivotal two-person Democratic U.S. Senate primary in this battleground state on Aug. 4.

The former local public-health official holds left-wing policy views that could turn off swing voters in November’s election, making the GOP eager to run against him, according to his opponent, four-term Congresswoman Haley Stevens.

El-Sayed is arguably the front-runner and has proven himself to be a stronger political athlete than Stevens, quick on his feet and social-media savvy. She describes herself as a workhorse competing against a show horse.

The primary will be the first major electoral test of the party’s direction since the implosion of Graham Platner’s Senate campaign in Maine, a debacle that could make some Democrats anxious about nominating another candidate who has never held elected office.

If El-Sayed wins, it would be a sign that the party’s leftward shift is taking place in the industrial heartland and not just in coastal and deeply blue enclaves. That makes the contest perhaps the most consequential battle yet between progressives and moderates in setting the party agenda.

The primary encapsulates virtually every division unsettling the party: Establishment vs. outsider. Pro-Israel vs. anti-Israel. Moderate vs. progressive. About the only thing missing is a generational clash, only because both candidates are in their early 40s.

El-Sayed is endorsed by Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York and the United Auto Workers. Stevens is backed by Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York, former Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm, former U.S. Sen. Debbie Stabenow of Michigan, some unions, pro-Israel groups and Emilys List, which supports abortion-rights candidates.

In an interview, El-Sayed dismissed criticism from Stevens and other establishment figures who say he is a risky bet for the party in a contest that Democrats almost certainly need to win to gain control of the Senate in November.

“It’s risky to put up a candidate who does not actually have clear positions on most of the issues that everybody wants,” he said. “It’s risky to tell people that the best thing we can do with our tax dollars is send them abroad to drop bombs on other people rather than to invest here.”

Michigan Republicans are poised to nominate former Rep. Mike Rogers, who narrowly lost the state’s 2024 Senate race. The seat is being vacated by Sen. Gary Peters, a Democrat not seeking a third term.

El-Sayed’s rise comes as Democrats remain deeply divided about how to start winning national elections again. One wing asserts battleground districts and states are won by wooing independent voters with moderation, while another thinks voters are eager for dramatic change at a time of widespread skepticism in government and widening economic disparity.

President Trump won Michigan in 2016 and 2024, and successful Democrats in the state have tended to emphasize centrism. That includes Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, who beat El-Sayed in a 2018 gubernatorial primary by 22 percentage points.

El-Sayed said he is convinced that voters are looking for fresh faces and the removal of those currently in office.

“They’re pissing mad, and they don’t think anybody’s listening to them,” he said. “So it’s not surprising to me that the people who have been in positions where they’re supposed to have shown up and listened and haven’t, that those people are going to be ushered out.”

A Muslim whose parents migrated from Egypt, El-Sayed grew up in the Detroit area. He graduated from the University of Michigan, where he was on the lacrosse team, then earned a Columbia University medical degree and a doctorate in public health at Oxford University.

El-Sayed supports Medicare-for-all, free child care and has campaigned with Hasan Piker, an influencer who has been accused of antisemitism. He calls Israel’s actions in Gaza “genocide” and wants to see the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency abolished.

Stevens, who declined an interview request, holds views less overtly progressive. She supports a healthcare public option, favors removing Social Security’s payroll tax cap so earnings above $184,500 would be taxed, and wants to see paid family leave for workers nationalized.

While polls have suggested El-Sayed is the front-runner, that was before the July 5 exit from the race of state Sen. Mallory McMorrow. She tried to cut a middle path between El-Sayed and Stevens but struggled to compete against his antiestablishment brand and raise money.

A private poll promoted by Steven’s campaign this past week showed her in a statistical tie with El-Sayed when primary voters were asked about the two-person contest, with about a fifth of the electorate undecided. El-Sayed said it was biased against him and he remains the front-runner.

El-Sayed has support among the growing Democratic Socialists of America movement, which Trump and other Republicans have branded as “communism” and are using as an attack line against all Democrats.

El-Sayed bristled when asked how he relates to DSA. “I’m not technically or practically DSA,” he said.

Still, there is overlap. Grand Rapids resident Nikolai Pieniazek, a 34-year-old regulatory analyst in the personal-care industry, was among those who attended an El-Sayed gathering in a local park before Tuesday’s debate here with Stevens.

“Younger voters don’t think of socialism as a boogeyman,” said Pieniazek, who was wearing a Bernie Sanders baseball cap. He said he’s working for El-Sayed’s campaign because Stevens is supported by the pro-Israel American Israel Public Affairs Committee, corporate interests and Schumer.

A super political-action committee affiliated with Aipac, the United Democracy Project, has been the biggest spender on advertising in the primary, according to AdImpact data. Groups backing Stevens have swamped El-Sayed on overall ad spending as well.

El-Sayed said that he isn’t against capitalism if there are sufficient guardrails. According to him, the U.S. is in the midst of “nonfunctional capitalism that creates trillionaires and makes it harder for every person to create basic wealth.” He said he would rather have an economy that “makes a thousand millionaires than one billionaire.”

The Rhodes scholar cites economist Adam Smith in making his case about the need for more regulation and taxation, before adding: “If you want capitalism to actually work, maybe stop paying attention to Wall Street and start paying attention to Main Street.”

While El-Sayed has strong support among younger voters, there are also older progressives who are drawn to him. Bev Clark, a 68-year-old retiree, was among roughly 250 people packed into a church basement in suburban Detroit on Wednesday evening.

“The government has been stuck in the mud, and I don’t hear Haley Stevens saying anything that will change that,” she said. “El-Sayed is independent in his thinking. He’s really dynamic.”

Speaking to Clark and others in the church basement, El-Sayed started with his campaign’s signature mantra that suggests he and those helping him are in the process of “getting money out of politics, putting money in pockets, and finally guaranteeing Medicare for all.”

Following on the AZN read-across: Soriot's FT interview ({MSG /ID 6A53155D0002B622284A0001 <GO>} lays out the exact demand backdrop — "nearly $20bn of sales" going generic after 2030 and only "halfway to a target of launching 20 new medicines by 2030" — that keeps AstraZeneca in the frame for a de-risked immunology asset. But AZN is the outsider on this list, not the favourite, and the price to play just went up.

The likely buyer field. Abivax has been a named takeover target since JPM in January, when Eli Lilly was reported to be eyeing a ~€15bn ($17.5bn) deal. The natural aggressors all have existing IBD/immunology muscle Abivax lacks:

The price tag has moved up, not down. The €15bn/$17.5bn January number now looks like a floor for three compounding reasons: obefazimod's Phase 3 maintenance data landed positive; the mid-year cancer-signal scare (stock -43% in early June) was largely walked back by end-June safety data (+36%); and — critically — Abivax just raised ~$920M to fund a solo US launch with runway to ~2029. That raise does two things to any bid: it adds cash to the equity bridge, and it removes the distressed-seller dynamic entirely. A buyer now has to pay a control premium over a company that has credibly said it doesn't need one. Net effect: the realistic take-out has drifted from ~$17.5bn toward $20bn+.

Why the premium holds — a quick scarcity check. The thing that makes obefazimod expensive is how rare its profile is: genuinely first-in-class mechanism (oral miR-124 enhancer), Phase 3 de-risked, in a market as big as UC + Crohn's (IBD is heading for ~$27–31bn by 2030). Scanning the late-stage biotech field for comparable "first-in-class + Phase 3 + IBD-scale TAM" assets, there aren't many:

The takeaway: most large-TAM Phase 3 assets are differentiated entrants in crowded classes. A new-mechanism, de-risked, ~$25bn-market asset is genuinely scarce — which is exactly why Abivax commands the premium, why its own board feels able to go it alone, and why any acquirer (AZN included) has to pay up to be in the room.

Best, Laurent

Sources: Lilly ~€15bn Abivax rumor (JPM26) · Abivax prime takeover target — CNBC · $920M raise / solo US launch — CNBC · June cancer-signal drop —43% — CNBC · Reassuring safety data / rebound — STAT · IBD market ~$27.7bn by 2030 — Grand View · MoonLake sonelokimab Phase 3

NEW YORK, July 10 (Reuters) - Activist investors in the U.S. must disclose the identities of their clients in regulatory filings, ​the Securities and Exchange Commission said in a move that may rattle hedge funds by requesting information they ‌have long fought to keep secret.

The updated interpretations on 13D filings and proxy statements, issued by the main U.S. securities regulator on Thursday, had not been expected and have not been widely reported, according to lawyers who work on investor activism, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the ​matter openly.

The SEC's new guidance on its Corporate Finance Interpretations clarifies how the agency views its rules on critical ​filings after a busy six months of activist campaigns.

The regulator did not respond to a request for ⁠comment on the changes or say what prompted it to issue the interpretation now.

The changes signal increased interest in transparency about ​what investors pushing for boardroom changes or other matters must say about their clients, the legal advisers said. The changes come ​as special purpose vehicles called "sidecars" are increasingly used to finance activist campaigns.

"The identities of the investors in an entity formed for the purpose of acquiring securities of a specific issuer and engaging in an activism campaign at that issuer must be disclosed," the SEC writes in answer to Question 110.09.

The ​answer to Question 155.02, which asks whether clients are considered "participants" in a limited partnership that aims to solicit votes to change ​board directors, is "yes" if these clients invested more than $500.

In the first half of 2026, investors including Elliott Investment Management, Ancora Alternatives and TOMS ‌Capital Investment ⁠Management have pushed companies ranging from media giant Warner Bros Discovery (WBD.O), opens new tab to Devon Energy (DVN.N), opens new tab to perform better.

In a particularly competitive part of financial markets, hedge funds have long prized secrecy around the identity of their investors. They argue that identifying anything about their business, including who is funding them, could embolden copycats and limit their ability to make money.

As hedge funds race to gather assets, ​more are relying on special purpose ​vehicles where potential investors are ⁠often told about the firm's strategy and the target company's name. It allows clients to make investments in specific companies, rather than be in a hedge fund's bigger pool of investments

But companies ​targeted by corporate activists say greater transparency, including knowing who is invested, is necessary information to ​defend themselves.

The SEC's ⁠interpretation will remind companies and hedge funds of 2022, when medical device company Masimo Corp, facing a fight with Politan Capital, amended its bylaws to force any activist planning to nominate directors to disclose the identities of the fund's limited partners and reveal future plans ⁠to nominate ​candidates elsewhere.

The Masimo bylaws sparked outrage among seasoned activist investors. And while few ​companies followed Masimo's lead, hundreds of corporations contacted their lawyers to ask whether they too should adopt such bylaws, attorneys said.

In early 2023 Masimo reversed course and ​stopped requiring hedge funds to detail this information. In 2026 it was purchased by Danaher

DUBAI, July 10 - The whereabouts of Mojtaba Khamenei have been a mystery to Iranians and the rest of the world alike since his appointment as supreme leader a week after the strike that killed his father at the end of February.

His absence from ​the main funeral ceremonies for former leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei was so complete there was not even a written message, leaving people to guess at his plans for Iran at a ‌turbulent time in the Islamic Republic's 47-year history.

Installed with the backing of the powerful Revolutionary Guards, he suffered facial disfigurement and other injuries in the strike, senior sources say. They say he has been making decisions but has not yet been well enough to appear in public.

Now, after hostilities with the U.S. reignited this week, his role and health are of critical — and growing — concern.

"I understand that, from a security standpoint, he should not appear in public. But the country is going through a very difficult time," ​said Taghi, 47, a shop owner in Isfahan who asked not to give his family name.

"There is a need for the Supreme Leader to be seen. Even if he has been injured, people ​need to see that there is a leader and that he is running the country."

The choreography of Thursday's burial, with prayers for ⁠the late Khamenei conducted over his coffin by his three other sons at Iran's holiest shrine, underscored the central place of family relationships among the Islamic Republic's leadership.

Mojtaba Khamenei's three brothers are not seen as significant ​political players in Iran — or likely to become so — though they have all become senior clerics.

But Ali Khomeini, a grandson of the founder of Iran's 1979 revolution, will speak on Mojtaba's behalf at a mourning ceremony on ​Friday, a nod to the way such family ties are used to emphasise continuity in the clerical system.

There had been speculation that Mojtaba Khamenei would finally appear — if not in person then with a recorded message or even new photographs — when his father was finally buried in the gold-domed shrine.

Senior sources in Iran have attributed the lack of any new image or voice recording since his March 8 appointment by a clerical assembly to health and security considerations.

The security risks are substantial given ​the assassination of his father in the very first U.S. and Israeli strikes of an unannounced war launched in the midst of diplomatic efforts to resolve the countries' disputes with Iran.

And as a political, strategic, ​religious and revolutionary figurehead bearing ultimate authority in Iran, he may need to appear more physically capable than his recuperation yet allows.

The last official word on his condition came from President Masoud Pezeshkian, who said in May that he met ‌the leader ⁠and his condition was improving.

While the Revolutionary Guards appear to hold a tight rein over the country for now, it is not clear how long the leader of a theocratic state can remain out of sight.

"How do you have a charismatic succession when the successor isn't there? It's going to be a problem for them even if they ride it out for the time being. It's not sustainable in the long run," said Ali Ansari, modern history professor at St Andrews University in Scotland.

His absence is starting to nag at Iranians, with more than 20 of those Reuters has contacted over recent weeks voicing concern ​about it in conversations about Iranian politics.

"The supreme leader's ​absence, now that the war is over, will ⁠lead to growing uncertainty and disorder in the country, especially after the burial of the late leader," said Mohammadreza, a 51-year-old teacher in Tehran.

The role of supreme leader is unlike that of most other heads of state, with Iran's official ideology recognising its officeholder as the representative on earth for Shi'ite Islam's 12th imam ​who disappeared in the ninth century.

It is not clear what Mojtaba Khamenei will make of it. The first leader, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, was the charismatic father ​of the revolution and Iran's ⁠most venerable religious scholar, a man whose untouchable standing and fierce mien inspired unquestioning obedience.

His successor, Ali Khamenei, had been president when he was appointed leader, but had never been seen as an especially senior religious figure, and initially lacked the authority of Khomeini.

However, during his 37 years as leader he outmanoeuvred rivals and, with the close aid of the Revolutionary Guards, imposed his absolute writ on nearly every aspect of the country's political life.

Mojtaba Khamenei also ⁠lacks religious credentials ​and, unlike his father, was not a powerful political figure in his own right. Instead he ran his father's sprawling office and ​its web of contacts across the country and built close ties with the Guards.

His opinions, authority and capability remain a blank slate, though it seems likely the Guards will remain central to the way he rules.

With Iran still mired in the conflict despite the on-off ​truce, with its economy still throttled by sanctions, and with further bouts of mass unrest like the one violently suppressed in January, the country's leader remains a cipher.