Market Signal Briefing

Was the recent CRV bounce the beginning of a trend reversal, or just a liquidity grab?

Bitcoin fuels BlackRock’s next wave of opportunity: crypto’s flagship asset is going more mainstream than ever.

Market Sentiment:

Bullish

Bearish

Neutral

Published:
December 23, 2025 │ 10:07 PM GMT

Created by Gabor Kovacs from DailyCoin

BlackRock, the multi-trillion asset management behemoth, just doubled down on Bitcoin (BTC). The company’s CEO Larry Fink explained that the financial infrastructure is moving away from the traditional assets by repotting them in a digital manner and then having the investors stay in the digital ecosystem.

BlackRock Proudly Declares Bitcoin Top 2025 Theme
Discussing the Q3 of 2025 results, BlackRock’s CEO named Bitcoin (BTC) as “one of the biggest investments this year”, seeing plenty of opportunities in the world of digital assets in the next ten years. Namely, BlackRock’s leading in Bitcoin-based exchange-traded funds (ETFs), securing IBIT ETF a comfortable spot in core institutional portfolios.

Managing over $12 trillion in assets under management (AUM), BlackRock’s Bitcoin pivot stems from massive $25 billion inflows via the IBIT Bitcoin Spot market price-tracking ETF. Regardless, the past month hasn’t been as successful, with the IBIT ETF dropping over $100 million in value for five days this December so far.

Other huge competitors like Grayscale were often selling off, enabling BlackRock to grab a piece of Grayscale’s clientele looking for a quicker-growing investment vehicle. However, Grayscale’s management fees are cheaper, currently 0.15% to BlackRock’s 0.25% on Bitcoin.

Following BlackRock’s Bitcoin commentary, the apex crypto asset danced around $88,000, witnessing a 2% downturn over the past 24 hours. Still sporting a hefty $47.22 billion in volume, Bitcoin’s (BTC) price is soaking up the turbulence with $101 million in long liquidations.

Delve into DailyCoin’s top crypto news today:
Forget the Halving: Analyst Reveals What Really Drives Bitcoin’s Biggest Bubbles
OCC Charters and Guidance Accelerate Regulated Crypto Banking

People Also Ask:
What key statement did Larry Fink make in the CNBC interview?

Larry Fink stated that crypto serves as an entry point for investors into markets, presenting a major opportunity for BlackRock to guide them toward traditional long-term retirement products over the next decade.

What does the interview highlight about asset tokenization?

The interview emphasizes that the world stands at the beginning of tokenizing all assets, repackaging traditional financial products digitally to keep users within a digital ecosystem.

Why does Fink consider this a long-term opportunity?

Fink views it as a multi-year chance because it shifts focus from conventional assets to digitized versions, fostering ongoing investment in retirement and other products via crypto gateways.

DailyCoin's Vibe Check: Which way are you leaning towards after reading this article?

Market Sentiment

100% Bullish

This article is for information purposes only and should not be considered trading or investment advice. Nothing herein shall be construed as financial, legal, or tax advice. Trading forex, cryptocurrencies, and CFDs pose a considerable risk of loss.

Tadas Klimasevskis

Tadas Klimaševskis is a DailyCoin Journalist, covering memecoins & latest developments.
Tadas has moderate holdings in SHIB, HBAR, LTC, MATIC and a selection of low-cap meme currencies.

Read more

SHIB

Shiba inu

Ad Disclosure

Ad Disclosure

We believe in full transparency with our readers. Some of our content includes affiliate links, and we may earn a commission through these partnerships. However, this potential compensation never influences our analysis, opinions, or reviews. Our editorial content is created independently of our marketing partnerships, and our ratings are based solely on our established evaluation criteria. Read More

Ad Disclosure

Ad Disclosure

We believe in full transparency with our readers. Some of our content includes affiliate links, and we may earn a commission through these partnerships. However, this potential compensation never influences our analysis, opinions, or reviews. Our editorial content is created independently of our marketing partnerships, and our ratings are based solely on our established evaluation criteria. Read More

Crypto Journalist

Anas Hassan

Crypto Journalist

Anas Hassan

Part of the Team Since

Jun 2025

About Author

Anas is a crypto native journalist and SEO writer with over five years of writing experience covering blockchain, crypto, DeFi, and emerging tech.

Has Also Written

Ad Disclosure

Ad Disclosure

We believe in full transparency with our readers. Some of our content includes affiliate links, and we may earn a commission through these partnerships. However, this potential compensation never influences our analysis, opinions, or reviews. Our editorial content is created independently of our marketing partnerships, and our ratings are based solely on our established evaluation criteria. Read More

Last updated: 

December 23, 2025

Shiba Inu (SHIB) holders and traders have been gripped by panic throughout 2025 as the token continues losing value, dropping over 66% year-over-year.

The latest Shiba Inu price prediction shows the immediate future of the dog-themed memecoin appears bleak going into 2026.

One OG member of the ShibArmy couldn’t contain his disappointment, taking to X to share his displeasure in a recent post saying “shib is going down and we are (as shib investors) losing money.”

The concerned investor called out to Shiba Inu founder Shytoshi Kusama to “please do something” to stop the price grinding slowly toward zero.

First-Ever Weekly Death Cross Signals Deeper Decline AheadAdding to the concerns, technical indicators show that Shiba Inu has completed its first-ever weekly death cross this year, where the shorter moving average crossed below the longer one, a classic bearish signal.

The token is now trading at $0.00000706, down about 3%, and more significantly, it’s breaking below a critical horizontal support level that had held since early 2023.

The descending trendline from the 2024 highs continues acting as resistance, with price moving lower within this downward channel.

Source: TradingViewWhat’s particularly concerning is that oscillators at the bottom show weakness, with both indicators hovering in the lower range around 37 and 31, suggesting diminished momentum and potential oversold conditions that haven’t yet triggered a bounce.

The technical setup reflects analysts’ expectations of continued decline, likely targeting psychological levels significantly lower than current prices.

Without a catalyst to break this pattern, the path of least resistance appears to be further downside, especially if the broken support level now acts as resistance on any attempted recovery.

Analyst Declares SHIB “Dead” Unless Key Support ReclaimedCrypto analyst Nebraskangooner has delivered the verdict that Shiba Inu is now “dead unless it reclaims the $0.00000135 support level.”

This represents a critical threshold that could determine whether SHIB can mount any meaningful recovery or continue its descent into 2026.

The confluence of technical breakdown, weakening momentum indicators, and deteriorating market sentiment paints a challenging picture for SHIB holders.

The completion of the weekly death cross, combined with the break below multi-year support, suggests the bearish structure could persist without significant fundamental catalysts.

Source: X/NebraskangoonerFor SHIB to reverse this trend, it would need to reclaim the broken support level, ideally with strong volume and momentum shifts in the oscillators.

Until then, traders remain cautious as fear continues dominating sentiment around one of the original 2021 cycle memecoins.

Pepenode Emerges as New Memecoin AlternativeWith Shiba Inu and other 2021 cycle memecoins entering bearish territory, new cycle memecoins like Pepenode (PEPENODE) are seeing attention turn to them as fresh opportunities for investors.

Pepenode is a crypto project that’s raised over $2.3 million despite the current challenging market conditions.

The project combines gaming mechanics with token mining, allowing users to “mine” coins without expensive computer equipment.

You play the game in your web browser, set up virtual mining rigs, and upgrade your facilities to earn 20% bonuses in real PEPE tokens.

The project aims to replicate the success of early-stage PEPE, which surged over 1,000X during the 2023-24 memecoin rally.

As more participants acquire Pepenode’s mining rigs, the token price is expected to appreciate.

The presale offers tokens at $0.0012112 each, with purchases available using ETH, BNB, or USDT.

Buyers can also use credit or debit cards for quick transactions.

To join the presale before price increases, visit the official Pepenode website and connect a crypto wallet like Best Wallet.

Visit the Official Pepenode Website Here

Follow us on Google News

TLDR

Shiba Inu spent much of 2025 stuck at minimum levels, affected by capital rotation toward safe-haven assets.
The ecosystem maintains hope in key catalysts like a potential SHIB ETF and the launch of its native stablecoin, SHI.
Analyst projections suggest the token could reach new all-time highs if it successfully executes its structural improvements.

2025 has been a brutal year for Shiba Inu holders. While Bitcoin retreated from $120,000 to $89,000, high-risk assets suffered a massive capital flight. Macroeconomic uncertainty, marked by trade tensions and a shift in the Federal Reserve’s stance, pushed investors toward precious metals, leaving memecoins in a vulnerable position.

However, a landscape of extreme pessimism is usually where the most unexpected market movements are born. The current scenario suggests that a Shiba Inu recovery in 2026 will not depend solely on social media speculation, but on tangible achievements within its network.

While there is a sudden media silence, the team led by Lucie continues working on developments that could change the institutional perception of the asset.

For instance, the implementation of the SHI stablecoin and discussions regarding a SHIB-based exchange-traded fund (ETF) are factors that would provide the legitimacy needed to attract fresh capital.

Technical Challenges and Projections Toward the New Cycle
For a Shiba Inu recovery next year to be sustainable, the project must break its dependence on extreme volatility. According to data from analysis firms like Flitpay, there is bullish potential that could drive the price toward ambitious targets of up to $0.0006678; however, this requires optimal market conditions and flawless execution of its technological updates.

SHIB’s future success is tied to the utility of its Layer 2, Shibarium, and its ability to reduce circulating supply through massive burns. If general crypto sentiment turns positive again, SHIB’s current low valuation could act as a spring.

Without significant progress in partnerships and real-world adoption, the asset risks repeating cycles of boom and bust.

For now, the market watches in silence, knowing that Shiba Inu has a habit of making noise just when everyone has left it for dead.

Trusted Editorial content, reviewed by leading industry experts and seasoned editors. Ad Disclosure

After the successful Midnight (NIGHT) token airdrop, Cardano founder Charles Hoskinson is getting a familiar question from ADA holders: if NIGHT is the new token tied to Cardano’s privacy network, why not sell ADA and move across? In a Dec. 21 appearance on the Discover Crypto podcast, he argued the premise is flawed because Midnight is designed to extend ADA, not replace it.

“They’re complimentary. They do different things,” Hoskinson said. “Midnight is the ChatGPT of privacy. That’s its job. It’s a blockchain to blockchain infrastructure module. So, what Midnight does is it actually makes Cardano applications have privacy.”

That distinction is central to his pitch: Midnight is positioned less as a liquidity siphon and more as an infrastructure module that gives Cardano-native apps a feature set they can use to differentiate in an increasingly crowded DeFi landscape. Hoskinson argued that early adopters are more likely to be Cardano applications precisely because they need a lever to compete for users, rather than larger incumbents elsewhere that tend to be slower-moving.

“Which ones do you think are going to adopt privacy first? Uniswap and PancakeSwap and all these giant things that are slow moving and they’re very conservative because they have a lot of users of value flow,” he said. “No, it’ll be Cardano applications. Because they need to gain users and so this is how they leapfrog the competition.”

From there, Hoskinson broadened the argument into a cross-chain liquidity thesis, leaning heavily on Bitcoin DeFi as a source of potential inflows. He described Bitcoin as relatively “agnostic” capital that will route to wherever yield, credit, and utility are most accessible, and claimed Cardano’s UTXO model makes it a more natural destination than account-based chains.

“When you look at Bitcoin… it doesn’t care if it goes to Ethereum or Solana or Cardano or other places to get yield,” he said. “It’s going to go to the closest continent and the closest continent is Cardano because it’s a UTXO system and Bitcoin is UTXO system. So through Cardano DeFi in particular upgraded with Midnight suddenly Bitcoin’s going to get privacy preserving yield and credit.”

He added that the same privacy-preserving yield concept could extend beyond Bitcoin. “And it’s the same for XRP and these other things,” Hoskinson said, arguing that Midnight’s privacy tooling is intended to “hybridize” on-chain and off-chain infrastructure rather than “steal TVL or steal luster from other systems.”

In practical terms, Hoskinson also tied the ADA-versus-NIGHT decision to distribution and security. He emphasized that Cardano “launched Midnight,” framing it as evidence the ecosystem can execute large-scale initiatives while positioning ADA holders for preferential participation.

“If you’re an ADA holder, you get first access to all of these things and you get the largest proportion of the airdrop,” he said. “And also, Cardano secures Midnight. So, that means ADA holders get NIGHT tokens.”

How High Can ADA Go?
Hoskinson was also pressed on Cardano price expectations. While he refrained to name any price targets, he used that moment to lay out what he described as a “value leakage” theory tied to Bitcoin’s institutional bid. He said Bitcoin is the only asset he feels comfortable forecasting with any confidence, arguing that large allocators are structurally “stuck” in Bitcoin exposure via ETFs and buy-and-hold mandates, which changes the old cycle mechanic where retail would rotate profits from BTC into alts.

In that setup, he suggested the main route for capital to spill from Bitcoin into other ecosystems is not spot rotation, but Bitcoin DeFi yield: if Cardano can offer yield and credit inside a risk profile that institutional holders can tolerate, demand can “leak” outward from BTC without investors selling BTC outright. That is the basis for his view that chains embracing Bitcoin DeFi could move more in sync with Bitcoin, while others could remain decorrelated, even if Bitcoin continues higher.

The broader message was less about discouraging trading behavior and more about presenting a structural rationale for staying exposed to ADA. In Hoskinson’s framing, Midnight is not meant to displace ADA; it is meant to expand the set of use cases Cardano applications can offer, while keeping ADA holders economically involved through security ties and token distribution.

At press time, ADA traded at $0.36.

ADA turns support into resistance, 1-week chart | Source: ADAUSDT on TradingView.com
Featured image created with DALL.E, chart from TradingView.com

Editorial Process for bitcoinist is centered on delivering thoroughly researched, accurate, and unbiased content. We uphold strict sourcing standards, and each page undergoes diligent review by our team of top technology experts and seasoned editors. This process ensures the integrity, relevance, and value of our content for our readers.

9 minutes ago

Bitcoin has been a “monster in financial markets” even though it hasn’t hit the most optimistic 2025 price targets, says Anthony Pompliano.

Bitcoin’s lack of an exciting year-end price rally may be the catalyst that prevents a significant crash in the first quarter of next year, according to Bitcoin entrepreneur Anthony Pompliano.

“Given where the volatility is right now, it would be very surprising that Bitcoin’s volatility has drastically compressed and yet still could get a 70% or 80% drawdown,” Pompliano said during an interview on CNBC on Tuesday.

Pompliano said the short-term disappointment from Bitcoin (BTC) holders over the asset not reaching $250,000 this year overlooks the broader performance. “We have to remember that Bitcoin is up 100% in two years. It’s up almost 300% in three years. It has been compounding,” he said. 

“This thing has been a monster in financial markets,” he added.

Pomp points to no “big 80% drawdown for BitcoinPompliano said that the decline in Bitcoin’s volatility has largely gone unnoticed by Bitcoin holders, compared with the attention on the asset’s price drop since the start of the year. 

“We didn’t get a blowoff top that I think people expected at the end of Q3, or beginning of Q4, but we haven’t seen the big 80% drawdown that people normally expect as well,” he said.

Bitcoin is trading at $87,436 at the time of publication, down 7.39% from its price on Jan. 1, according to CoinMarketCap.

Anthony Pompliano spoke to CNBC on Tuesday. Source: CNBC TelevisionBitcoin advocates such as BitMine chair Tom Lee and BitMEX co-founder Arthur Hayes had forecast Bitcoin price reaching as high as $250,000 this year.

Pompliano said the compression in volatility means holders may be “a little bit disappointed on the upside” due to the absence of blow-off tops, but it also provides “some degree of safety” on the downside, reducing the likelihood of massive drawdowns.

Some Bitcoin analysts are tipping $60K in 2026However, not all analysts are as confident as Pompliano.

Veteran trader Peter Brandt recently predicted that Bitcoin could fall as low as $60,000 by the third quarter of 2026.

Meanwhile, Jurrien Timmer, Fidelity’s director of global macroeconomic research, said 2026 could be a “year off” for Bitcoin, with prices potentially falling to as low as $65,000.

Magazine: Big questions: Would Bitcoin survive a 10-year power outage?

TL;DR

Coinbase now supports SOL deposits and withdrawals via the Base network, connecting Solana and Ethereum ecosystems.
Users can transfer SOL directly within Coinbase’s system, reducing reliance on external bridges.
SOL on Base functions as an ERC-20 token, usable in Ethereum-based DeFi applications.

Coinbase Exchange has expanded its Solana (SOL) support by allowing deposits and withdrawals via the Base network, an Ethereum-aligned infrastructure built for scalability and interoperability. The update connects two major blockchain ecosystems through a direct bridge, simplifying the transfer of assets between them.

The integration enables users to move SOL between Solana and Base with fewer steps and greater security, while also unlocking SOL liquidity inside Ethereum-based applications. The move reflects the growing demand for cross-chain access among active traders seeking faster, frictionless interaction between networks without relying on third-party bridges.

According to Coinbase, users can now treat SOL on Base as an ERC-20 compatible asset, allowing it to function within Ethereum-based decentralized applications (dApps). Beyond improving operational flexibility, the feature strengthens Coinbase’s control over asset movement within its own infrastructure and consolidates liquidity under its exchange environment.

SOL Transfers Between Solana and Base Inside Coinbase
The new option allows users to send SOL directly from Coinbase to wallets on Base. The process follows the standard withdrawal flow — users select SOL, choose the Base network, enter a destination address and amount, and confirm the transaction. Once completed, SOL arrives on Base without leaving Coinbase’s system, minimizing interoperability risks and reducing settlement times.

Deposits follow a similar process. Users select SOL, confirm their intent, and copy the Base deposit address generated by Coinbase. They then send SOL from an external wallet, after which the funds are automatically credited once confirmed on the network.

Coinbase’s design keeps activity within its trading environment while enhancing user experience through integrated cross-chain functionality. The update also signals closer technical alignment between the Solana and Ethereum networks, two of the most active ecosystems in today’s crypto market.

SOL on Base: DeFi Access and Lower Bridge Dependence
With SOL now available on Base, users can deploy Solana liquidity across Ethereum-style DeFi protocols, participate in cross-chain liquidity pools, or rebalance portfolios without complex routing. Developers also gain broader access to liquidity and easier integration opportunities across blockchain frameworks.

In addition to improving efficiency, the feature reduces reliance on third-party bridge platforms, which are often vulnerable to security breaches. By keeping transfers internal, Coinbase reinforces its role as a central gateway for multi-chain trading and aligns with the institutional push for interoperable infrastructure.

However, regional restrictions apply. Coinbase has limited SOL on Base access in New York, Canada, the United Kingdom, and Japan, along with several countries in Europe and the Asia-Pacific region. The company advises users to verify eligibility before initiating transfers, as regional availability depends on local regulatory frameworks.

Journalist

Posted: December 24, 2025

The decline in Solana’s price is now raising fear among intraday traders, as nearly $90 million worth of long-leveraged positions are on the verge of liquidation.

On the 23rd of December, the overall crypto market declined by 1.65%, led by Bitcoin and Ethereum, which posted losses of 2.45% and 2.75%, respectively, over the past 24 hours, influencing broader market sentiment.

Amid the market decline, Solana [SOL] fell by 1.55% and is trading at the $124.30 level. During the same period, traders and investors showed strong interest, with trading volume surging more than 17% to $3.55 billion.

The rising trading volume, along with a price decline, suggests that market participants are interested in SOL’s current trend, as further recorded on the derivative tool CoinGlass.

According to the SOL exchange liquidation map, intraday traders are heavily over-leveraged at $123.30 on the lower side and $129.50 on the upper side, where the highest interest has been recorded.

At these levels, traders have built $89.54 million worth of long-leveraged positions and $204.18 million worth of short-leveraged positions.

Source: CoinGlass

This indicates strong bearish sentiment among intraday traders, with a firm belief that the SOL price will not cross the $129.5 level.

Despite the short-term bearish outlook, crypto and Wall Street investors are adding SOL to their portfolios, as the price appears to be struggling.

Is Solana bullish in long term?
Per the Spot Inflow/Outflow, more than $8.77 million worth of SOL has flowed out of exchanges into wallets, indicating potential accumulation and suggesting that it may be protecting SOL from further decline.

Source: CoinGlass

Another factor that appears to be preventing further downside in SOL is the consistent inflows into U.S. Solana spot exchange-traded funds (ETFs) since the 4th of December.

Inflows into crypto ETFs suggest that Wall Street investors are deploying fresh capital into digital investment products, reflecting growing interest in the underlying assets.

Moreover, sustained inflows into spot Solana ETFs indicate rising demand for SOL, which is a bullish signal for holders.

Source: SoSoValue

Solana: price action and key levels to watch 
AMBCrypto’s technical analysis of the weekly chart suggested that SOL was at a key support level of $117.

On the daily chart, SOL appeared to be consolidating within a tight range, with support at $123.50 and resistance at $128.23.

If sentiment remains unchanged and the price breaks below the lower boundary of the consolidation range, SOL could see a sharp downside move toward the broader support at the $117 level.

However, an upside rally would only be possible if the SOL price decisively clears the $128.23 level.

Source: TradingView

Final Thoughts

Intraday traders have built $89.54 million worth of long positions, which are now at risk as the price continues to decline.
The broader trend remains bullish, as both crypto-native and Wall Street investors maintain a positive outlook, pointing to a potential buying opportunity.

Vivaan Acharya is a Crypto-Economist and Journalist at AMBCrypto who brings a rare depth of financial and economic expertise to the world of digital assets. He holds a Master’s in Economics from the prestigious University of Delhi and has over five years of experience analyzing technology and financial markets.
His foray into the blockchain space began in 2018, marked by his prescient Master's thesis, "Payments and Stablecoin Integration in Banking," which showcased his early understanding of crypto's potential to disrupt traditional finance. Before specializing in crypto, Vivaan honed his skills in rigorous data and technical chart analysis at a major national financial daily, where he covered corporate earnings and market trends.
At AMBCrypto, Vivaan applies this powerful blend of classical economic training and seasoned financial journalism to his work. He is an expert in:
1. Bitcoin and Altcoin Market Analysis
2. Stablecoin Ecosystem Development, and
3 Emerging Crypto Regulations.
Known for his clear, no-nonsense approach, Vivaan translates robust research into straightforward, actionable insights. He is dedicated to demystifying the complexities of blockchain finance, empowering readers to confidently navigate the rapidly evolving digital economy.

Trusted Editorial content, reviewed by leading industry experts and seasoned editors. Ad Disclosure

On a Token Relations webinar for the XRP ecosystem on Dec. 20, Ripple CTO David Schwartz was asked the sort of question that usually produces a tidy dashboard answer, what on-chain metrics actually matter, what’s “real” economic activity, and what trends are showing up across the ledger (and, yes, the ETF chatter in the background). He went straight to the point: usage that sticks, value that moves, and the boring-but-decisive plumbing that financial institutions actually care about will “take over the world.”

How Ripple Wants To Make The XRPL Mainstream
“I definitely focus on metrics that show sustained usage and real value moving through the network,” Schwartz said. “Transaction activity is probably the clearest signal. The XRP ledger has now processed more than four billion transactions with pretty consistent settlement in about four to five seconds at a fairly predictable fee.”

That’s the pitch in one breath: scale, predictable finality, and fees so low you don’t have to pretend they’re a feature.“You know, a transaction on the XRP ledger costs a tiny fraction of a penny,” the Ripple CTO added. “It’s not trying to extract value from people’s transactions. That’s trying to enable people to do what they need to do.”

Then he pivoted to liquidity, the kind of line XRP holders love to hear, but framed as infrastructure rather than tribal scoreboard-watching. “Liquidity is another huge factor,” Schwartz said. “XRP is a top five digital asset by market capitalization and has been for I think 10 years now, about 109 billion dollars deep global liquidity for real financial activity. That depth matters.”

The bigger point he kept coming back to was momentum in actual network use, not just “we issued a token and it sat there.”

“The XRP ledger itself is now one of the top 10 blockchains for real world activity this year with a rate of increase that’s just absolutely astonishing from a use case that was you know almost unthinkable just a year ago,” he said. “We now have institutional issuers like Guggenheim, Ondo [Finance], Aberdeen [Standard Investments], Franklin [Templeton].”

And then the part that’s meant to separate “RWA theater” from RWAs that matter: “And it’s not just issuance, you know, it wouldn’t be super exciting if they were just sort of issuing an asset on chain that just sort of sat on chain,” the Ripple CTO said. “What’s interesting is that these assets are actually moving and settling on chain. So the financial activity is getting the benefit.”

That little distinction is where a lot of tokenization narratives either hold up or collapse. Anybody can “issue” a thing on a ledger. The harder bit is getting it to behave like financial infrastructure, moving, settling, plugging into workflows that aren’t built for crypto vibes.

Schwartz also threw a bit of cold water on the current retail mix. XRPL has users who love the tech (and users who love leverage), but he was pretty blunt that this isn’t the endgame.

But obviously that’s not how we’re going to take over the world. We’re going to take over the world with solid financial products that solve real world use cases. And we are actually starting to see that now enabled by things like stablecoins and tokenized real world assets that let us handle these use cases like payments and like reasonable investments, tokenized money, market funds and treasuries,” he said. “

And retail might follow the institutions, not the other way around. The Ripple CTO pointed to “more than 500,000 new wallets” created, framing it as early evidence that institutional rails can drag everyday users in behind them.

At press time, XRP traded at $1.88.

XRP falls below key support, 1-week chart | Source: XRPUSDT on TradingView.com
Featured image created with DALL.E, chart from TradingView.com

Editorial Process for bitcoinist is centered on delivering thoroughly researched, accurate, and unbiased content. We uphold strict sourcing standards, and each page undergoes diligent review by our team of top technology experts and seasoned editors. This process ensures the integrity, relevance, and value of our content for our readers.

flash news

Schiff Sounds Alarm: Bitcoin Faces Four Painful Years

Peter Schiff, analyst and gold advocate, has issued a stark warning, claiming that the next four years will be much worse for Bitcoin. In his

Bitcoin News

Bitcoin Holds Range as Year-End Liquidity Dries Up and Traders Step Back

TL;DR Bitcoin trades in a tight range with low liquidity, marking its weakest year-end in seven years. Massive $23.7B Bitcoin options expire on December 26,

Markets

Crypto Market Stumbles as Bitcoin Fails $90K Breakout

TL;DR Bitcoin failed to break above $90,000 and retraced to $87,830, triggering $250 million in liquidations, almost $200 million of which were long positions. Altcoins

Bitcoin News

Bitcoin Faces A Critical Test At $90K As Price Enters Tight Consolidation

TLDR The digital asset market began the week under high technical tension. The Bitcoin price  faces stiff resistance in the $90,000 zone, a psychological and

Companies

Binance Reclaims the Throne: CME Loses Top Spot in Bitcoin Futures Open Interest

TL;DR CME lost its leadership in bitcoin futures, and Binance returned to the top spot in open interest, driven by weaker institutional participation and the

Markets

JPMorgan Moves Toward Institutional Crypto Trading

TL;DR JPMorgan plans institutional crypto trading services for spot and derivatives. CEO Jamie Dimon’s stance has shifted to facilitating client access. The bank joins growing

Bitcoin is struggling to reclaim the $90,000 level, and market confidence continues to deteriorate as an increasing number of analysts begin to call for a prolonged bear market. Sentiment has turned decisively cautious, with investors reassessing risk exposure and preparing for a potentially challenging period ahead. Despite multiple attempts to stabilize, price action remains compressed, offering little confirmation that bullish momentum is ready to return.

According to an analysis by XWIN Research Japan, the current market phase is best described as a range-bound consolidation following a high-level correction, with momentum conditionally tilted to the downside. While Bitcoin has remained largely sideways over the past three months, traditional safe-haven assets have followed a very different trajectory.

Gold and silver have continued to push higher, reflecting rising demand for defensive assets amid persistent geopolitical tensions, policy uncertainty, and expectations of lower real interest rates.

This divergence highlights a structural challenge for Bitcoin in the current macro environment. Institutional capital can allocate to precious metals with relative ease, benefiting from deep liquidity, established market infrastructure, and clear regulatory frameworks. Silver, in particular, has amplified gold’s move, supported by tighter supply dynamics and greater sensitivity to speculative flows.

Bitcoin’s Role as a Risk Asset Limits Its Upside
The analysis explains that Bitcoin has not followed gold and silver higher because it is still treated primarily as a high-beta risk asset, rather than a pure safe haven. In risk-off environments, capital typically flows first into gold and government bonds, where investors seek stability and capital preservation. Bitcoin, by contrast, is often a secondary consideration, attracting flows only after confidence improves.

Unlike gold’s long-term and relatively price-insensitive buyer base, Bitcoin remains more exposed to short-term positioning and marginal demand, making broad macro tailwinds insufficient on their own to sustain a durable uptrend.

CryptoQuant data reinforces this interpretation. Bitcoin’s apparent demand has recently turned negative, signaling that fresh demand is not expanding even as prices hold at relatively elevated levels.

Bitcoin apparent demand | Source: CryptoQuant
At the same time, Short-Term Holder SOPR has spent extended periods below 1, indicating that short-term participants are selling at a loss or near breakeven. This behavior typically adds selling pressure on rebounds, as underwater holders use price strength to exit positions.

As long as capital continues to favor gold and silver, Bitcoin’s internal demand structure remains a key constraint. The base case points to continued support for precious metals, while Bitcoin’s upside stays capped by weak demand and short-term holder pressure. That view would only change if apparent demand turns sustainably positive and STH SOPR reclaims and holds above 1.

Price Holds Critical Support as Trend Weakens
Bitcoin is currently trading near the $87,000–$88,000 area after a sharp corrective move from recent highs above $110,000. The chart shows that price has lost the short-term bullish structure, with BTC now firmly below the 50-day moving average (blue), which has started to slope downward. This confirms that short-term momentum has turned negative and rallies are facing increasing overhead supply.

BTC testing structural support | Source: BTCUSDT chart on TradingView
More importantly, price is now testing the 100-day moving average (green), which sits just above the current level and has acted as dynamic support throughout much of this cycle. The market’s reaction around this zone is critical. A sustained hold above the 100-day MA could allow Bitcoin to stabilize and form a base, while a decisive breakdown would likely expose the 200-day moving average (red), currently rising near the low $80,000s.

Volume dynamics reinforce the cautious outlook. The sell-off from the October peak was accompanied by elevated volume, signaling distribution rather than a shallow pullback. Since then, volume has tapered off, suggesting a lack of aggressive dip-buying interest at current levels.

Structurally, Bitcoin remains in a broader uptrend as long as it holds above the 200-day MA, but the loss of the 50-day and weakening momentum indicate consolidation or further downside risk in the near term. Bulls need a recovery back above $90,000 to regain control and shift sentiment meaningfully.

Featured image from ChatGPT, chart from TradingView.com

HomeStock IdeasLong IdeasConsumer 

SummaryJD.com remains a "Buy" despite recent underperformance and technical weakness, with a revised price target of $48.Q3 results showed strong 15% revenue growth, driven by Net Services and General Merchandise, but margins were diluted by Food Delivery losses.Management expects high single-digit margins long-term, with FY 2026 EPADS above $3.50 and 30% YoY bottom-line growth through FY 2027.Valuation is compelling with a 3.44% dividend yield and 3% FCF yield, but risks include competition, margin pressure, and technical downtrend. Robert Way/iStock Editorial via Getty Images

It has been a strong year for Chinese equities, but not all stocks in the world’s second-largest economy are doing well. I had a "Buy" rating on JD.com (JD) back in the third quarter, but shares of the now $41.3 billion

Analyst’s Disclosure:I/we have no stock, option or similar derivative position in any of the companies mentioned, and no plans to initiate any such positions within the next 72 hours. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Seeking Alpha's Disclosure: Past performance is no guarantee of future results. No recommendation or advice is being given as to whether any investment is suitable for a particular investor. Any views or opinions expressed above may not reflect those of Seeking Alpha as a whole. Seeking Alpha is not a licensed securities dealer, broker or US investment adviser or investment bank. Our analysts are third party authors that include both professional investors and individual investors who may not be licensed or certified by any institute or regulatory body.

Not for Distribution to U.S. Newswire Services or for Dissemination in the United States.

VANCOUVER, British Columbia, Dec. 23, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- First Atlantic Nickel Corp. (TSXV: FAN) (OTCQB: FANCF) (FSE: P21) (“FAN” or the “Company”) announces that it has closed its non-brokered private placement (the “Offering”) of flow-through common shares, issued without warrants, for aggregate gross proceeds of $2,619,316. In connection with the Offering, a strategic investor exercised its top-up rights under an Investor Rights Agreement, which entitles it to maintain an ownership interest in the Company of up to 9.99%. The Offering consisted of (i): 3,201,220 charity flow-through common shares (each, a “CFT Share”) issued at a price of $0.2432 per CFT Share; and (ii) 8,765,618 flow-through common shares of the Company (each, a “FT Share”) issued at a price of $0.21 per FT Share. Each of the CFT Shares and FT Shares was issued on a “flow-through” basis pursuant to the Income Tax Act (Canada).

The proceeds of the Offering will be used on the Company’s Pipestone XL Nickel Alloy Project in Newfoundland to incur eligible “Canadian exploration expenses” that will qualify as “flow-through mining expenditures,” as those terms are defined in the Income Tax Act (Canada) (the “Qualifying Expenditures”), on or before December 31, 2026. The Company will renounce all Qualifying Expenditures to subscribers effective December 31, 2025.

The Company intends to use the proceeds to immediately advance drilling and exploration at the RPM Zone, test newly identified drill targets across the Pipestone XL Project, and expand the scope and scale of its metallurgical recovery and processing program.

Please call 844-592-6337 or email [email protected] to connect with Rob Guzman, First Atlantic Nickel's Investor Relations, for questions or more information.

PIPESTONE XL ALLOY PROJECT

The Pipestone XL Nickel Alloy Project spans the entire 30-kilometer Pipestone Ophiolite Complex in central Newfoundland, a continuous belt of serpentinized ultramafic rocks enriched in nickel and chromium. First Atlantic holds 100% control of the complex, which hosts multiple discovery zones including the RPM Zone, Super Gulp, Atlantic Lake, and Chrome Pond, all containing awaruite (Ni₃Fe), a naturally occurring nickel-iron-cobalt alloy with approximately 75% nickel content.

Figure 1: Pipestone XL Alloy Project showing awaruite target zones along 30km trend over total magnetic intensity (TMI).

Unlike conventional nickel sulfide deposits that require energy-intensive smelting, awaruite's sulfur-free composition and strong magnetic properties enable concentration through simple magnetic separation, eliminating acid mine drainage risks while reducing dependence on overseas processing infrastructure. The project benefits from year-round road access and proximity to clean hydroelectric power within one of the world's top-ranked mining jurisdictions, positioning Pipestone XL to contribute to a secure and reliable North American nickel supply chain for the stainless steel, electric vehicle, aerospace, and defense industries.

FROM ROCKS TO POWER

“Awaruite is not a sulfide nor an oxide nickel ore but a high-content native nickel–iron ore. Simple beneficiation processes after mining could provide 60% Ni concentrate, ready for leaching for battery cathode purposes and would yield MHP as a by-product. This process would bypass pyrometallurgy or early hydrometallurgy stages and be among the lowest carbon-intensive nickel production sites in the global nickel market.” (Battery Metals Association of Canada, From Rocks to Power)

Figure 2: United States Geological Survey (USGS) quote on awaruite nickel-iron-cobalt alloy deposits.

The sulfur-free nature of awaruite (Ni₃Fe), a naturally occurring nickel-iron-cobalt alloy already in metallic form, eliminates the need for secondary processes such as smelting, roasting or acid leaching that are typical of sulfide or laterite nickel ores. Unlike sulfides, which are not natural alloys, awaruite avoids the challenge of sourcing smelter capacity, a bottleneck in North America's nickel supply chain. With an average nickel grade of approximately 75%, awaruite significantly exceeds the ~25% nickel grade characteristic of pentlandite. Awaruite's strong magnetic properties enable concentration through magnetic separation, as demonstrated by Davis Tube Recovery (DTR) testing at First Atlantic's RPM Zone drill core.

Awaruite eliminates the electricity requirements, emissions, and environmental impacts associated with conventional smelting, roasting or acid leaching processes of common nickel minerals. Moreover, awaruite's sulfur-free composition removes the risks of acid mine drainage (AMD) and related permitting challenges commonly posed by sulfide minerals. As noted by the United States Geological Survey (USGS) in 2012: "The development of awaruite deposits in other parts of Canada may help alleviate any prolonged shortage of nickel concentrate. Awaruite, a natural iron-nickel alloy, is much easier to concentrate than pentlandite, the principal sulfide of nickel."

Investor Information

The Company's common shares trade on the TSX Venture Exchange under the symbol "FAN", the American OTCQB Exchange under the symbol "FANCF" and on several German exchanges, including Frankfurt and Tradegate, under the symbol "P21".

Investors can get updates about First Atlantic by signing up to receive news via email and SMS text at www.fanickel.com.

Investors are invited to sign up for the official FAN (First Atlantic Nickel) List found at www.fanickel.com and can follow First Atlantic Nickel on the following social media.

FOR MORE INFORMATION:

First Atlantic Investor Relations

Robert Guzman

Tel: +1 844 592 6337

[email protected]

Disclosure

In connection with the Offering, the Company paid cash finder’s fees of $52,552.50 and issued an aggregate of 210,000 non-transferable finders’ warrants (the “Finders’ Warrants”) to eligible arm’s length finders, in accordance with TSX Venture Exchange policies and applicable securities laws. Each Finders’ Warrant entitles the holder to purchase one common share of the Company at an exercise price of $0.21 for a period of two years from the date of issuance.

The FT Shares and CFT Shares were offered by way of private placement pursuant to applicable exemptions from the prospectus requirements under applicable securities laws. All securities issued in connection with the Offering are subject to a statutory hold period of four months and one day from the closing date of the Offering, in accordance with applicable Canadian securities laws. The Offering remains subject to receipt of final approval from the TSX Venture Exchange.

This news release does not constitute an offer to sell or a solicitation of an offer to buy any securities in the United States or any other jurisdiction. No securities may be offered or sold in the United States absent registration under the U.S. Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or an applicable exemption from such registration, and no securities may be offered or sold in any jurisdiction where such offer or sale would be unlawful.

Adrian Smith, P.Geo., a director and the Chief Executive Officer of the Company is a qualified person as defined by NI 43-101. The qualified person is a member in good standing of the Professional Engineers and Geoscientists Newfoundland and Labrador (PEGNL) and is a registered professional geoscientist (P.Geo.). Mr. Smith has reviewed and approved the technical information disclosed herein.

ABOUT FIRST ATLANTIC NICKEL CORP.

First Atlantic Nickel Corp. (TSXV: FAN) (OTCQB: FANCF) (FSE: P21) is a critical mineral exploration company in Newfoundland & Labrador developing the Pipestone XL Nickel Alloy Project. The project spans the entire 30-kilometer Pipestone Ophiolite Complex, where multiple zones, including RPM, Super Gulp, Atlantic Lake, and Chrome Pond, contain awaruite (Ni₃Fe), a naturally occurring magnetic nickel-iron-cobalt alloy of approximately ~75% nickel with no-sulfur and no-sulfides, along with secondary chromium mineralization. Awaruite's sulfur-free composition removes acid mine drainage (AMD) risks, while its unique magnetic properties enable processing through magnetic separation, eliminating the electricity requirements, emissions, and environmental impacts of conventional smelting, roasting, or high-pressure acid leaching while reducing dependence on overseas nickel processing infrastructure.

The U.S. Geological Survey recognized awaruite's strategic importance in its 2012 Annual Report on Nickel, noting that these deposits may help alleviate prolonged nickel concentrate shortages since the natural alloy is much easier to concentrate than typical nickel sulfides1. The Pipestone XL Nickel Alloy Project is located near existing infrastructure with year-round road access and proximity to hydroelectric power. These features provide favorable logistics for exploration and future development, strengthening First Atlantic’s role to establish a secure and reliable source of North American nickel production for the stainless steel, electric vehicle, aerospace, and defense industries. This mission gained importance when the US added nickel to its critical minerals list in 20222, recognizing it as a non-fuel mineral essential to economic and national security with a supply chain vulnerable to disruption.

Forward-looking statements:

This news release may include “forward-looking information” within the meaning of applicable Canadian securities legislation. Forward-looking information reflects management’s current beliefs and is based on estimates, assumptions and information currently available to the Company that, while considered reasonable, are subject to known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause actual results and future events to differ materially from those expressed or implied by such forward-looking information. Forward-looking information is provided for the purpose of assisting readers in understanding the Company’s current expectations and plans and may not be appropriate for other purposes. Forward-looking information speaks only as of the date of this news release.

Forward-looking information in this news release includes, but is not limited to, statements regarding: the receipt of final acceptance of the Offering from the TSX Venture Exchange; the intended use of proceeds of the Offering; the Company’s ability to incur eligible “Canadian exploration expenses” that will qualify as “flow-through mining expenditures” (as such terms are defined in the Income Tax Act (Canada)); the timing of incurring the Qualifying Expenditures; and the timing and ability of the Company to renounce Qualifying Expenditures to subscribers, including the anticipated effective renunciation date.

Forward-looking information is based on, among other things, assumptions regarding: the Company’s ability to obtain TSX Venture Exchange final acceptance and any other required regulatory approvals in a timely manner; the Company’s ability to allocate and incur Qualifying Expenditures as intended and within the required time periods; the Company’s continued ability to access its properties and carry out exploration and related programs at the Company’s Pipestone XL Nickel Alloy Project as currently planned; the availability, performance and cost of personnel, services, equipment and supplies; the timing of, and ability to obtain, necessary permits and regulatory authorizations; and general business, economic and financial market conditions.

Readers are cautioned that forward-looking information is neither a promise nor a guarantee and is subject to known and unknown risks and uncertainties, including, without limitation, risks relating to: the inability to obtain TSX Venture Exchange final acceptance or other required approvals; the Company’s ability to use the proceeds as currently contemplated; the Company’s ability to incur Qualifying Expenditures and renounce them to subscribers within the timelines required under the Income Tax Act (Canada); exploration and development risks; environmental and permitting risks; changes in commodity prices; uncertain and volatile equity and capital markets; lack of available capital; operating risks; accidents; labour issues; and other risks inherent in the mining industry. Additional risks and factors are discussed in the Company’s disclosure documents available under the Company’s profile on SEDAR+ at www.sedarplus.ca. Should one or more of these risks or uncertainties materialize, or should assumptions underlying the forward-looking statements prove incorrect, actual results may vary materially from those described herein as intended, planned, anticipated, believed, estimated or expected.

The Company is presently an exploration stage company. Exploration is highly speculative in nature, involves many risks, requires substantial expenditures, and may not result in the discovery of mineral deposits that can be mined profitably. Furthermore, the Company currently has no mineral reserves on any of its properties. As a result, there can be no assurance that such forward-looking statements will prove to be accurate, and actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such statements. The Company undertakes no obligation to update forward-looking information, except as required by applicable securities laws.

Neither the TSX Venture Exchange nor its Regulation Services Provider (as that term is defined in the policies of the TSX Venture Exchange) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release.

1 https://d9-wret.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/assets/palladium/production/mineral-pubs/nickel/mcs-2012-nicke.pdf
2 https://www.usgs.gov/news/national-news-release/us-geological-survey-releases-2022-list-critical-minerals

Photos accompanying this announcement are available at: 

https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/aa704c79-b843-438b-b9ea-dc7114bf8ff1

https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/6ba899b7-dd63-40aa-bc21-cf655802a0ad

Toronto, Ontario--(Newsfile Corp. - December 23, 2025) - Volta Metals Ltd. (CSE: VLTA) (FSE: D0W) (OTC Pink: VOLMF) ("Volta" or the "Company") is pleased to announce the closing of an oversubscribed and upsized non-brokered private placement for gross proceeds of $2,810,508 (the "Offering"). The Offering was comprised of the issuance of 12,219,601 common shares of the Company issued on a "flow-through" basis (each, a "FT Share") at a subscription price of $0.23 per FT Share.

The FT Shares will qualify as "flow-through shares" (within the meaning of subsection 66(15) of the Income Tax Act (Canada).

The Company will use the gross proceeds from the sale of the FT Shares to incur eligible "Canadian exploration expenses" that will qualify as "flow-through critical mineral mining expenditures" as such terms are defined in the Income Tax Act (Canada) (the "Qualifying Expenditures") on or before December 31, 2026. The Company plans to initiate a second-phase drill program to further explore its recently acquired Springer advanced Rare Earth and Gallium Deposit and explore its Aki Critical Minerals Project. All Qualifying Expenditures will be renounced in favour of the subscribers of the FT Units with an effective date not later than December 31, 2025.

As in every financing the Company has completed to date, whereby certain directors and officers of the Company have participated in such financings, thereby increasing insiders' holdings, a director of the Company acquired an aggregate of 87,000 FT Shares under the Offering. Such participation in the Offering by such director constitutes a "related party transaction" within the meaning of Multilateral Instrument 61-101 - Protection of Minority Security Holders in Special Transactions ("MI 61-101"). The Company relied on an exemption from the formal valuation and minority shareholder approval requirements provided under MI 61-101 pursuant to section 5.5(a) and section 5.7(1)(a) of MI 61-101, on the basis that the participation in the Offering by such director does not exceed 25% of the fair market value of the Company's market capitalization.

In connection with the closing of the Offering, the Company paid commissions to certain finders an aggregate of $163,560 in cash and 711,132 finder warrants (the "Finder Warrants"). Each Finder Warrant entitles the holder thereof to purchase one (1) common share of the Company (a "Finder Warrant Share") at an exercise price of $0.23 per Finder Warrant Share for a period of twenty-four months from the closing of the Offering. The securities issued and issuable under the Offering are subject to a statutory hold period in Canada of four months and one day from the closing date of the Offering in accordance with applicable Canadian securities laws. The closing of the Offering is subject to the receipt of all required regulatory approvals, including the approval of the Canadian Securities Exchange (the "CSE").

Volta's CEO, Kerem Usenmez, commented, "This financing represents the largest amount Volta has raised, at the highest share price and with the fastest closing to date. The strong investor response validates our strategy, and the capital raised positions Volta to accelerate exploration and unlock additional value at the Springer deposit while continuing to reduce project risk."

For more information about the Company, view Volta's website at www.voltametals.ca.

ABOUT VOLTA METALS LTD.

Volta Metals Ltd. (CSE: VLTA) (FSE: D0W) (OTC Pink: VOLMF) is a mineral exploration company based in Toronto, Ontario, focused on rare earths, gallium, lithium, cesium, and tantalum. It owns, has optioned and is currently exploring a critical minerals portfolio of rare-earths, gallium, lithium, cesium, and tantalum projects in Ontario, one of the world's most prolific, emerging hard-rock critical mineral districts. To learn more about Volta and its Springer and Aki Projects, please visit www.voltametals.ca.

ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD

For further information, contact:

Neither the CSE nor the Investment Industry Regulatory Organization of Canada accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release.

This news release contains forward-looking statements relating to product development, plans, strategies, and other statements that are not historical facts. Forward-looking statements are often identified by terms such as "will", "may", "should", "anticipate", "expects" and similar expressions. All statements other than statements of historical fact included in this news release are forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. Forward-looking information in this news release includes, but is not limited to, the anticipated use of the net proceeds from the Offering, that the funds from the Offering will allow Volta to unlock the potential of, and de-risk, the Springer deposit and the receipt of all necessary approvals for the Offering. There can be no assurance that such statements will prove to be accurate, and actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such statements. Important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from the Company's expectations include: the risks detailed from time to time in the filings made by the Company with securities regulators; the fact that Volta's interests in its mineral properties are options only and there are no guarantee that such interest, if earned, will be certain; the future prices and demand for lithium; rare earth elements and gallium; and delays or the inability of the Company to obtain any necessary approvals, permits and authorizations required to carry out its business plans. The reader is cautioned that assumptions used in the preparation of any forward-looking statements may prove to be incorrect. Events or circumstances may cause actual results to differ materially from those predicted, as a result of numerous known and unknown risks, uncertainties, and other factors, many of which are beyond the control of the Company. The reader is cautioned not to place undue reliance on any forward-looking statements. Such information, although considered reasonable by management at the time of preparation, may prove to be incorrect and actual results may differ materially from those anticipated. Forward-looking statements contained in this news release are expressly qualified by this cautionary statement. The forward-looking statements contained in this news release are made as of the date of this news release, and the Company disclaims any intention or obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events, or otherwise, other than as required by law.

To view the source version of this press release, please visit https://www.newsfilecorp.com/release/278937

Source: Volta Metals Ltd.

Ready to Announce with Confidence?
Send us a message and a member of our TMX Newsfile team will contact you to discuss your needs.

Contact Us

IRVINE, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Mountain Mike's Pizza was ranked #7 among U.S. restaurant chains and #9 overall on Yelp's Most Loved Brands of 2025 list.

Amazon.com Today

$232.14 +3.71 (+1.62%)

As of 04:00 PM Eastern

52-Week Range$161.38▼

$258.60P/E Ratio32.79

Price Target$295.50

Shares of tech giant Amazon.com Inc. NASDAQ: AMZN closed just under $230 on Monday, a level that neatly captures the tension surrounding the stock right now.

Shares are still up about 40% from April’s lows, yet they remain more than 10% below the November high that briefly looked like the start of a major breakout. 

Get Amazon.com alerts:

Bear in mind, this is a stock that is trading right around the same level it started the year at. Against that lacklustre backdrop, a growing number of bullish updates raises a simple question—if so many analysts see Amazon as a $300 stock, how come it’s taking so long to get there? 

Why Analysts Keep Pointing to $300
The latest round of bullish updates suggests investors have a lot to look forward to in the coming months, even if the stock isn’t acting like it. The team at BMO Capital Markets reiterated its Outperform rating just last week while raising its price target to $304. That update followed similar moves from Cowen and JPMorgan earlier this month, both of which reiterated Buy ratings with price targets of $300 and $305, respectively.

Overall MarketRank™98th Percentile

Analyst RatingModerate Buy

Upside/Downside27.3% Upside

Short Interest LevelHealthy

Dividend StrengthN/A

News Sentiment0.88 Insider TradingSelling Shares

Proj. Earnings Growth17.91%

See Full Analysis

Longer-term readers of MarketBeat will know these are not isolated opinions. They reflect a broader view that Amazon’s long-term earnings power remains underappreciated at current levels. As they have for much of the year, analysts continue to point to improving operating leverage, steady growth in higher-margin segments, and a core retail business that looks more disciplined than it has in years. Importantly, these calls have come despite the stock already being well off its April lows, suggesting analysts are comfortable leaning bullish even after a strong run.

What stands out is not just the targets themselves, but the timing of them. These latest updates arrived after Amazon failed to hold its November highs, a moment when it would have been easy to strike a more cautious tone. Instead, analysts have been doubling down, and that behavior matters. It signals confidence that recent consolidation is not a sign of fundamental weakness, but part of a larger setup.

Why the Stock Still Isn’t Moving
For all that optimism, however, the stock’s price action tells a different story. Amazon has, aside from a few sharp moves in either direction, been trading in a narrowing range for months, with each rally attempt stalling and each pullback finding support. Since July, the chart has been defined by consolidation rather than momentum, aside from that brief post-earnings pop in November, which quickly faded.

That kind of behavior often reflects a market waiting for confirmation. Investors are not rushing for the exits, but they are also not willing to chase the stock higher without a clearer catalyst. It could be that after a 40% rally since the spring, expectations are higher, and incremental upside now requires evidence rather than assumption.

Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) Price Chart for Tuesday, December, 23, 2025

There is also a timing element at play. Amazon’s story is increasingly framed around medium-term execution rather than immediate acceleration. That makes the stock less reactive to individual analyst notes and more sensitive to proof points that show margin improvement and growth durability are translating into sustained earnings power. Until that happens, the market appears content to let the range tighten.

What Could Finally Unlock the Next Leg Higher
This is where the narrowing range becomes important. Periods of prolonged consolidation often precede larger moves, particularly when they follow a strong advance rather than a decline. In Amazon’s case, the stock is digesting gains rather than giving them back, which is typically a constructive sign.

Off the back of this, the recent analyst updates help frame the likely direction of travel once the stock starts to move with some conviction again. With multiple firms anchoring their views around the $300 mark, the balance of opinion is clearly skewed higher, as much as 30% higher from current levels. That obviously does not guarantee a breakout to the upside, but it does suggest that if a fresh bullish catalyst emerges, resistance above current levels may be thinner than it appears.

For now, it’s safe to say that the disconnect between all these bullish analyst targets and the stock’s muted price action is less of a contradiction than an emerging setup. Analysts are looking further out, while the market waits for the next piece of evidence. As the range continues to narrow into the new year, however, that waiting period may be nearing its end.

Should You Invest $1,000 in Amazon.com Right Now?Before you consider Amazon.com, you'll want to hear this.

MarketBeat keeps track of Wall Street's top-rated and best performing research analysts and the stocks they recommend to their clients on a daily basis. MarketBeat has identified the five stocks that top analysts are quietly whispering to their clients to buy now before the broader market catches on... and Amazon.com wasn't on the list.

While Amazon.com currently has a Moderate Buy rating among analysts, top-rated analysts believe these five stocks are better buys.

View The Five Stocks Here

Enter your email address and we'll send you MarketBeat's list of ten stocks that are set to soar in 2026, despite the threat of tariffs and other economic uncertainty. These ten stocks are incredibly resilient and are likely to thrive in any economic environment.

Get This Free Report

By

PYMNTS
 | 
December 23, 2025

 | 

Insurance company Aflac said personal information associated with 22.65 million people was impacted by a cybersecurity incident within its U.S. business that the company reported in June.

The company determined the number of affected people after reviewing the potentially impacted files, it said in a Friday (Dec. 19) press release.

“Following detection of the security incident, Aflac promptly secured accounts identified as potentially impacted and took additional steps, including resetting passwords and further monitoring for signs of suspicious activity,” the company said in the release. “To date, Aflac is not aware of any fraudulent use of personal information and—along with third-party partners—will continue to monitor any fraudulent activity.”

Aflac has begun to notify individuals impacted by the incident, per the release.

When the company disclosed the cybersecurity incident in June, it said that it identified suspicious activity on its U.S. network, initiated its cyber incident response protocols and stopped the intrusion within hours. The company’s systems were not affected by ransomware and its business remained operational.

“This attack, like many insurance companies are currently experiencing, was caused by a sophisticated cybercrime group,” Aflac said in a June 20 press release. “This was part of a cybercrime campaign against the insurance industry.”

Advertisement: Scroll to Continue

Aflac said in the June release that its review of potentially impacted files was in its early stages and that it had not determined the number of affected individuals.

In an update released along with the Friday press release, Aflac said it determined on Dec. 4 that the files that may have been impacted in the security incident likely contained personal information that triggers notification under applicable law.

The review determined that this information was associated with customers, beneficiaries, employees, agents and other individuals related to Aflac, and that it included names, contact information, claims information, health information, Social Security numbers, and other information, per the update.

Aflac said in the update that it provided its customers with credit monitoring, identity theft protection, medical fraud protection and other resources early in its response to the incident; it did not wait until it had finalized this review.

The FBI’s Internet Crime Complaint Center (IC3) said in April that personal data breaches were one of the top three types of cybercrime reported by victims in 2024.

Among critical infrastructure organizations, data breaches were one of the top two most reported cyber threats, according to IC3’s “Internet Crime Report 2024.”

Sign up to receive our daily newsletter.

We’re always on the lookout for opportunities to partner with innovators and disruptors.

Talk to Sales

NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--The law firm of Kirby McInerney LLP announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed on behalf of investors who acquired Klarna Group plc (“Klarna” or the “Company”) (NYSE:KLAR) securities during the period of September 7, 2025 through December 22, 2025, inclusive (“the Class Period”). If you suffered a loss on your Klarna investments, you have until February 20, 2026 to request lead plaintiff appointment. For more information: [CONTACT THE FIRM IF YOU SUFFERED A.

AAOI surged to a new 52-week high this week as demand for data centers continues. George Tsilis breaks down the company's growth in sales across.

Vancouver, British Columbia--(Newsfile Corp. - December 23, 2025) - Aero Energy Limited (TSXV: AERO) (OTC Pink: AAUGF) (FSE: UU3) ("Aero" or the "Company") is pleased to announce that, further to its news release dated December 11, 2025, it has closed the first tranche (the "First Tranche") of its previously announced non-brokered private placement (the "Offering") through the issuance of an aggregate of 5,502,392 post-Consolidation (as defined below) common shares ("NFT Shares") at a price of $0.23 per NFT Share for gross proceeds of $1,265,550.

A second and final tranche of the Offering (the "Second Tranche") for additional gross proceeds of approximately $3,734,450 is expected to close on or about December 29, 2025, and is expected to consist of the issuance of a combination of:

5,367,173 NFT Shares at a price of $0.23 per NFT Share for gross proceeds of approximately $1,234,450; and 7,142,857 charity flow-through post-Consolidation common shares of the Company ("CFT Shares") at a price of $0.35 per CFT Share for gross proceeds of $2,500,000, with each CFT Share qualifying as a "flow-through share" within the meaning of the Income Tax Act (Canada) and as an "eligible flow-through share" within the meaning of The Mineral Exploration Tax Credit Regulations, 2014 (Saskatchewan).The Company plans to use the proceeds of the Offering as follows:

the net proceeds from the sale of NFT Shares will be used to fund the exploration and advancement of the Company's uranium properties in Saskatchewan and Nevada, and general working capital purposes; andthe gross proceeds received from the sale of the CFT Shares will be used to incur (i) eligible "Canadian exploration expenses" that qualify as "flow-through critical mineral mining expenditures" as both terms are defined in the Income Tax Act (Canada) and (ii) "eligible flow-through mining expenditures, as defined in The Mineral Exploration Tax Credit Regulations, 2014 (Saskatchewan) (collectively, the "Qualifying Expenditures") related to the Company's projects in Saskatchewan, on or before December 31, 2026. Such Qualifying Expenditures will be renounced in favour of the subscribers of the CFT Shares effective December 31, 2025.The Offering, including the First Tranche, is subject to the receipt of all necessary regulatory and other approvals, including, but not limited to, final approval of the TSX Venture Exchange (the "Exchange").

In connection with the First Tranche, finder's fees of $62,796 were paid in cash and 273,026 finder's warrants (the "Finder's Warrants") were issued to Eventus Capital Corp., an eligible arm's length finder. Each Finder's Warrant will be exercisable to acquire one post-Consolidation common share of the Company (a "Finder's Warrant Share") at a price of $0.23 until December 23, 2027.

The NFT Shares issued pursuant to the First Tranche were issued pursuant to Part 5A.2 of National Instrument 45-106, as amended by Coordinated Blanket Order 45-935 - Exemptions from Certain Conditions of the Listed Issuer Financing Exemption. Such NFT Shares are not subject to a hold period in accordance with applicable Canadian securities laws, other than those sold to an officer and director of the Company which are subject to a hold period expiring on April 24, 2026 in accordance with the policies of the Exchange. The Finder's Warrants issued in connection with the First Tranche and the Finder's Warrant Shares issuable upon the due exercise thereof are and will be subject to a hold period expiring on April 24, 2026.

An officer and director of the Company acquired 870,000 NFT Shares for gross proceeds of $200,100 pursuant to the First Tranche, and as such the First Tranche is considered a related party transaction within the meaning of Policy 5.9 of the Exchange and Multilateral Instrument 61-101 - Protection of Minority Security Holders in Special Transactions ("MI 61-101"). Neither the Company, nor to the knowledge of the Company after reasonable inquiry, a related party, has knowledge of any material information concerning the Company or its securities that has not been generally disclosed. The Company has relied on exemptions from the formal valuation and minority approval requirements of sections 5.5(a) and 5.7(1)(a) of MI 61-101 in respect of such insider participation, based on a determination that the fair market value of the participation in the First Tranche by the insider will not exceed 25% of the market capitalization of the Company, as determined in accordance with MI 61-101. The Company did not file a material change report more than 21 days before the expected closing of the First Tranche because the details of the participation therein by a related party of the Company were not settled until shortly prior to closing of the First Tranche and the parties wished to close on an expedited basis for business reasons.

Effective December 23, 2025, the Company implemented the previously announced share consolidation on the basis of ten pre-consolidation common shares for each one post-consolidation common share (the "Consolidation").

This news release does not constitute an offer to sell or a solicitation of an offer to buy any of the securities in the United States of America. The securities have not been and will not be registered under the United States Securities Act of 1933 (the "1933 Act") or any state securities laws and may not be offered or sold within the United States or to U.S. Persons (as defined in the 1933 Act) unless registered under the 1933 Act and applicable state securities laws, or an exemption from such registration is available.

About Aero Energy Limited

Aero Energy Limited, following its successful merger with Kraken Energy Corp. ("Kraken"), has established a robust portfolio of uranium assets in North America. The company controls a district-scale land package in Saskatchewan's Athabasca Basin, including its Strike and Murmac projects, which collectively host dozens of shallow drill-ready targets on the north rim of the Athabasca Basin. These projects are guided by an award-winning technical team with a proven track record, responsible for major discoveries such as Gryphon, Arrow, and Triple-R. Additionally, Aero's portfolio includes Kraken's 100%-owned Apex Uranium Property, Nevada's largest past-producing uranium mine, and the Huber Hills Property, spanning 1,044 ha in Nevada and encompassing the historic Race Track open pit mine. This strategic merger combines Aero's extensive Canadian exploration assets with Kraken's high-grade U.S. properties, positioning Aero to unlock significant high-grade, unconformity-style uranium mineralization and capitalize on the growing global demand for uranium. For more information about Aero, please visit aeroenergy.ca.

Neither the TSX Venture Exchange nor its Regulation Services Provider (as that term is defined in the policies of the TSX Venture Exchange) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this release.

Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Information

This news release includes certain statements and information that constitute forward-looking information within the meaning of applicable Canadian securities laws. All statements in this news release, other than statements of historical facts, are forward-looking statements. Such forward-looking statements and forward-looking information specifically include, but are not limited to, statements that relate to the completion of the Second Tranche, the planned use of net proceeds of the Offering, the tax treatment of the CFT Shares, the renouncement of applicable expenditures, and timely receipt of all necessary approvals, including the final approval of the Exchange, and exploration and development of the Company.

As well, forward-looking Information may relate to future outlook and anticipated events, such as the consummation and timing of the Second Tranche; the anticipated benefits and impacts of the Offering; the use of proceeds from sale of the NFT Shares and the CFT Shares, the renunciation of applicable expenditures; the proposed tax treatment of the CFT Shares, the results from work performed to date; exploration prospects of mineral properties; requirements for additional capital; the future price of metals; government regulation of mining operations; environmental risks; the timing and possible outcome of pending regulatory matters; the realization of the expected economics of mineral properties; future growth potential of mineral properties; and future plans, projections, objectives, estimates and forecasts and the timing related thereto.

Statements contained in this release that are not historical facts, including all statements regarding the planned completion of the Second Tranche, are forward-looking statements that involve various risks and uncertainty affecting the business of the Company. Such statements can generally, but not always, be identified by words such as "adjacent", "plans", "prolific", "focus", "extension", "intended", "advance", "potential", "opportunity," "impact", "establish", "propose", "strategic", "important", "plan", "milestone", "prime", "success", "undertake", "provide", "preeminent", "contemplate", "exposure", "strong", "transformation", "represent", "numerous", "accessible", "intension", "ability", "intend", "identify", "expand", variants of these words and similar expressions, or that events or conditions "will", "would", "may", "could" or "should" occur. All statements that describe the Company's plans relating to operations and potential strategic opportunities are forward-looking statements under applicable securities laws. These statements address future events and conditions and are reliant on assumptions made by the Company's management, and so involve inherent risks and uncertainties, including, the ability or inability to obtain all necessary regulatory approvals for the Offering, including final TSXV approval; the realization of benefits from the Offering; permits, the inability to use the proceeds from sale of the NFT Shares and the CFT Shares as intended, the inability to renounce applicable expenditures; the availability of the proposed tax treatment of the CFT Shares; consents or authorizations required for mining activities, and material delays in obtaining them; the absence of adverse conditions at mineral properties; no unforeseen operational delays; the price of uranium and other metals remaining at levels that render mineral properties economic; the Company's ability to continue raising necessary capital to finance operations; and the ability to realize on any mineral resource and reserve estimates; the Company's ability to complete its planned exploration programs; the absence of adverse conditions at properties; no unforeseen operational delays; the Company's ability to continue raising necessary capital to finance operations; environmental regulations or hazards and compliance with complex regulations associated with mining activities; climate change and climate change regulations; fluctuations in exchange rates; the business objectives of the Company; whether economic mineralization can be defined and, if it can be permitted for development; the uncertainty that any mineralization encountered on adjacent properties continues on to any of the Company's properties; the uncertainty that geological and/or geophysical and/or any trends, interpretations, or conclusions related to adjacent properties have relevance to any of the Company's properties; the uncertainty that the exploration season can be extended; changes in project parameters as plans to continue to be refined; the consequences and implications of the historical mining activities on the environment and whether such affects the potential exploration and/or development of any mining operation the Company's properties; the implications of claims from First Nations, Tribes, Tribal Councils, Tribal Governments or other indigenous entities and peoples and land claims settlements on the Company's projects; accidents, labour disputes and other risks of the mining industry, conclusions of economic evaluations; meeting various expected cost estimates; benefits of certain technology usage; future prices of metals; possible variations of mineral grade or recovery rates; geological, mining and exploration technical problems; failure of plant, equipment or processes to operate as anticipated; accidents, labour disputes and other risks of the mining industry; the speculative nature of mineral exploration and development; title to properties, such further risks as disclosed in the Company's filings with Canadian securities regulators and management's ability to anticipate and manage the foregoing risks and uncertainties. As a result of these risks and uncertainties, and the assumptions underlying the forward-looking information, actual results could materially differ from those currently projected, and there is no representation by the Company that the actual results realized in the future will be the same in whole or in part as those presented herein. Readers are referred to the additional information regarding the Company's business contained in the Company's filings with securities regulatory authorities in Canada on SEDAR+ (www.sedarplus.ca). Although the Company has attempted to identify important factors that could cause actual actions, events, or results to differ materially from those described in forward-looking statements, there may be other factors that could cause actions, events or results not to be as anticipated, estimated or intended. For more information on the Company and the risks and challenges of its business, investors should review the Company's filings that are available on SEDAR+ (www.sedarplus.ca).

The Company provides no assurance that forward-looking statements and information will prove to be accurate, as actual results and future events could differ materially from those anticipated in such statements or information. Accordingly, readers should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements or information. The Company does not undertake to update any forward-looking statements, other than as required by law.

NOT FOR DISTRIBUTION TO U.S. NEWS WIRE SERVICES OR FOR DISSEMINATION IN THE UNITED STATES

To view the source version of this press release, please visit https://www.newsfilecorp.com/release/278991

Source: Aero Energy Limited

Ready to Announce with Confidence?
Send us a message and a member of our TMX Newsfile team will contact you to discuss your needs.

Contact Us

Not for distribution to United States newswire services or for release, publication, distribution or dissemination, directly or indirectly, in whole or in part, in or into the United States.

VANCOUVER, BC / ACCESS Newswire / December 23, 2025 / KALO GOLD CORP. (TSXV:KALO) ("Kalo", "Kalo Gold" or the "Company") is pleased to announce that, further to its news release dated December 2, 2025, the Company has closed the first tranche of its previously announced non-brokered private placement under the Listed Issuer Financing Exemption (as defined herein) of 7,648,750 units (the "Unit") at $0.32 per Unit (the "Offering Price") for gross proceeds of $2,447,600 (the "LIFE Offering"). Concurrently, the Company has also closed the first tranche of its previously announced non-brokered private placement of Units of 25,110,625 Units at the Offering Price for gross proceeds of $8,035,400 (the "Concurrent Offering", and together with the LIFE Offering, the "Offerings") for total aggregate proceeds of $10,483,000.

Each Unit consists of one common share (each, a "Share") in the capital of the Company and one-half of one common share purchase warrant (each, a "Warrant"). Each Warrant is exercisable for one Share at the exercise price of $0.50 for a period of thirty-six months from the date of issue. In addition, the expiry date of the Warrants is subject to acceleration if the volume weighted average trading price of the Shares on the TSX Venture Exchange ("TSXV") (or such other stock exchange where the Shares are then listed or quoted) is greater than $0.75 for a period of twenty (20) consecutive trading days, in which case the expiry date of the Warrants may be accelerated to a date that is thirty (30) days following the date the Company provides notice to the Warrant holders, by way of a news release, that the expiry date has been accelerated.

The LIFE Offering is being conducted under the listed issuer financing exemption as per Part 5A of National Instrument 45-106 - Prospectus Exemptions, as amended by Coordinated Blanket Order 45-935 - Exemptions from Certain Conditions of the Listed Issuer Financing Exemption (the "Listed Issuer Financing Exemption"). As a result, the securities acquired under the LIFE Offering by investors resident in Canada will not be subject to a hold period pursuant to applicable Canadian securities laws. Provided, however, that any Warrants issued pursuant to the LIFE Offering are not exercisable within 60 days. All securities acquired pursuant to the Concurrent Offering will be subject to a hold period of four (4) months pursuant to applicable Canadian securities laws.

The Company intends to use the net proceeds of the Offerings for drilling and exploration on the Vatu Aurum Project and working capital, marketing and general corporate purposes.

In connection with the Offerings, the Company paid finder's fees in the amount of $117,684 and issued 367,762 finder's warrants. Each finder's warrant entitles the holder to acquire one Share at an exercise price of $0.50 per share for a period of 36 months from the date of issuance, under the same terms as the Warrants issued pursuant to the Concurrent Offering.

The Company will complete one or more additional tranches of the Offerings up to the maximum amount previously announced. Any such additional closings will remain subject to the approval of the TSXV and all other necessary regulatory approvals.

One insider of the Company participated in the Concurrent Offering for approximately C$500,000. The issuance of Units to such insider is considered a "related party transaction" within the meaning of Multilateral Instrument 61-101 - Protection of Minority Security Holders in Special Transactions ("MI 61-101"). The Company is relying on exemptions from the formal valuation requirements of MI 61-101 pursuant to section 5.5(a) and the minority shareholder approval requirements of MI 61-101 pursuant to section 5.7(1)(a) in respect of such insider participation as the fair market value of the transaction, insofar as it involves interested parties, does not exceed 25% of the Company's market capitalization.

The securities issued pursuant to the Offerings have not been, and will not be, registered under the United States Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the "U.S. Securities Act"), or any state securities laws, and may not be offered or sold in the United States or to, or for the account or benefit of, "U.S. persons" (as defined in Regulation S under the U.S. Securities Act) absent registration or an applicable exemption from such registration requirements. This news release does not constitute an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy any securities in any jurisdiction in which such offer, solicitation or sale would be unlawful.

About Kalo Gold Corp.

Kalo Gold Corp., a gold exploration company, focused on epithermal gold deposits on the Company's Vatu Aurum Project, located on Vanua Levu (North Island). Kalo holds 100% of two Special Prospecting Licenses covering 367 km², encompassing a regional back-arc basin with volcanic calderas. Historical and ongoing exploration has identified numerous priority epithermal gold targets.

On behalf of the Board of Directors of Kalo Gold Corp.

Terry L. Tucker, P.Geo.
President and Chief Executive Officer

Kevin Ma, CPA, CA
Executive Vice President, Capital Markets and Director

For more information, please write to [email protected].

Neither the TSXV nor its Regulation Services Provider (as that term is defined in the policies of the TSXV) accepts responsibility for the adequacy or accuracy of this press release.

Forward Looking Statements Disclaimer

This press release may contain certain forward-looking statements and forward-looking information (collectively, "forward-looking statements") related to the closing of the Offerings, use of proceeds and other such future events and Kalo's future business, operations, and financial performance and condition. Forward-looking statements normally contain words like "will", "intend", "anticipate", "could", "should", "may", "might", "expect", "estimate", "forecast", "plan", "potential", "project", "assume", "contemplate", "believe", "shall", "scheduled", and similar terms. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance, actions, or developments and are based on expectations, assumptions, and other factors that management currently believes are relevant, reasonable, and appropriate in the circumstances. Although management believes that the forward-looking statements herein are reasonable, actual results could be substantially different due to the risks and uncertainties associated with and inherent to Kalo's business. Additional material risks and uncertainties applicable to the forward-looking statements herein include, without limitation, the impact of general economic conditions, and unforeseen events and developments. This list is not exhaustive of the factors that may affect the Company's forward-looking statements. Many of these factors are beyond the control of Kalo. All forward-looking statements included in this press release are expressly qualified in their entirety by these cautionary statements. The forward-looking statements contained in this press release are made as at the date hereof, and Kalo undertakes no obligation to update publicly or to revise any of the included forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events, or otherwise, except as may be required by applicable securities laws. Risks and uncertainties about the Company's business are more fully discussed under the heading "Risk Factors" in its most recent management's discussion and analysis. They are otherwise disclosed in its filings with securities regulatory authorities available on SEDAR+ at www.sedarplus.ca.

SOURCE: Kalo Gold Corp.

Guggenheim's Seamus Fernandez joins 'Fast Money' to talk Novo Nordisk getting Wegovy pill approved.

The Trump administration on Tuesday imposed visa bans on a former European Union commissioner and anti-disinformation campaigners it says were involved in censoring U.S. social media platforms, in the latest move in a campaign aimed at European rules that U.S. officials say go beyond legitimate regulation.

Longfin Media/iStock via Getty Images

Listen here or on the go via Apple Podcasts and Spotify

Streaming and media expert Dan Rayburn shares why investors should only care about the Warner Bros/Netflix/Paramount deal if it happens (0:40). NFL and NFLX; streaming and sports (11:00). Appropriate metrics to use in this space (18:40). Brand and revenue: Apple, Google, Amazon, Disney, Netflix (27:40). What is TV? (45:00)

Transcript

Rena Sherbill: Dan Rayburn, an expert if there ever was one in the streaming space, in the media space, which encompasses so many things right now. Dan has been on a few times before, he's been writing on, or we've been having his writing offered on Seeking Alpha for quite some time. He runs his own blog, streamingmediablog. He makes copious media appearances on various mainstream networks. Dan, welcome to the show.

If you would start us off. What do you feel like is top of mind? Netflix (NFLX) is obviously in the headlines a bunch, vis-a-vis Warner Brothers (WBD), vis-a-vis the dance with Paramount (PSKY), vis-a-vis sports. What is top of mind for you or what are the few things that you're thinking about?

Dan Rayburn: There sure is a lot. Netflix is always top of mind and just thanks for having me again. We could do a podcast every single day based on the news that is put out in the industry just around sports streaming, let alone all the other types of streaming business models out there, bundling deals, pricing deals.

Sports is always an interesting one, especially because we've got in the last couple quarters, some new deals between Major League Baseball, Apple, naturally with the Formula One deal.

Very interesting the fact that the NFL is really leveraging the streaming services in their global reach to expand their footprint as opposed to where the games always were, which were broadcasters, especially on Christmas when it has some of the highest viewing windows out there.

All three games are going to be exclusively on Netflix and Prime Video, except in local markets for teams. I would say also for investors, focusing on the financials and what the numbers actually show.

And that can be hard to do when there's so much speculation about what will happen with WBD, Paramount, Netflix. It seems to change every day. It's incredible how many headlines are wrong.

I'm constantly pointing out on LinkedIn. I can't believe how many people are reporting the deal's already done. Or they say phrases like Netflix has acquired WBD.

Like, what? How can you even create a graphic like that? It's mind boggling to me. So for investors, you also just have to understand what information is real and separate facts from opinions.

Rena Sherbill Let's get into the speculative deal between Warner Brothers and somebody. Maybe it's gonna be Paramount, maybe it's gonna be Netflix.

Certainly some things that have developed since the initial deal with Netflix and Warner Brothers has happened with these hostile offers from Paramount. But as you said, a lot of speculation.

You may not be a betting man, but you're an expert in the field. You've been around a long time, 30 plus years perhaps, I think. What would you say may happen and what would you say given the various scenarios, what would you expect investors should have in mind given the various scenarios and possibilities?

Dan Rayburn: I think investors should only care about the deal if it happens. Not what could, should, might, would maybe happen because there's too many different scenarios there. I would look at what the facts are of the deals and there's two of them being discussed right now. Yes, they continue to change to some degree. They might change again based on what is offered.

We already see where the money is coming from on the Paramount Sky Dan side. We see where Netflix has gotten the money. They've put out some regulatory filings already.

I think if you're an investor, what you have to think about is what is the impact to consumers? And I find it fascinating that you have some large unions and others that have come out into the market and said that if Netflix acquires the portion of WBD they'd be acquiring, it's terrible because it takes a choice out of the market for consumers.

And yet, isn't one of the biggest complaints we all have as consumers is that there's too many different streaming services? So, I don't think it's a problem as far as removing choice in the market. What we don't know is what would Netflix do from a packaging standpoint? Would Netflix roll that content into WBD content into Netflix? Would they keep HBO Max separate?

A lot of what investors are not realizing though is also what's being proposed in this deal.

Because as part of this deal, if it goes through with Netflix and WBD, Netflix would get live TV channels in the UK, they get TNT, they get sports rights, they get the Olympics in 2028. That's a very different business than what Netflix is in today. In addition, Netflix would be getting the platforms and systems internally that are currently providing the linear HBO channel to third party partners. MVPDs.

Is that a business Netflix wants to be in?

We don't know. So they're getting a bunch of assets here providing the deal goes through, that we really don't know what Netflix take on that is. However, this idea that just Netflix will acquire it and lay everybody off, they can't afford to do that. Netflix is not a studio. Only WBD is. They're still gonna have to rely on the people who produce this content, distribute it. Netflix has already said they want to continue what WBD is doing as far as releasing movies in theaters.

Now, I understand when people say, well, that's not very specific. Maybe they shorten that window. They might. We don't know. But I think investors have to focus on this deal once it's actually done. And I should have just said in the beginning, too, to make this clear. I don't own stock in any of companies we're talking about. I'm not a financial analyst in terms of making bets.

I don't give out investment advice. I talk to a lot of companies involved. I talk to distribution partners, studios, movie theater chains, broadcast or sports leagues, I look at the data and I try and make educated decisions based on that.

And that's really what I think investors should be looking at. Now flip side to that, it's hard to only look at that because in the current US political environment, we know that politics plays a part of these large potential acquisitions more so than they did five or 10 years ago.

So part of this is also going to be tied to politics. There's just no way around that. I don't hedge bets on which deal we'll go through or not go through, but it's very clear that WBD has assets that are extremely valuable from a content standpoint.

Rena Sherbill: Does the hostile offer from Paramount surprise you? Does the trajectory of this deal slash deals, does that surprise you? Does it inform any of your opinion in this realm or slightly outside of this realm?

Dan Rayburn: No, it doesn't to me because now you have people leaking text chats between two different CEOs. You have insiders talking who shouldn't be naturally, which we always have in this deal, any deal this size.

You have rumors that are thrown out there that aren't actually based on facts or it's based on one person's opinion. So a deal of this size, it's really not surprising. We think about the industry tied to studios, streaming, sports. Yes, it often falls under media entertainment.

We'd be hard pressed to find a deal that's being proposed that is this large and this significant over the last, call it 10 years. Yes, Amazon, MGM, Studios, different. That was just Studios only. You could think of the AT&T (T) deal, DirecTV, which obviously didn't go well, but that's again, not quite the same here because AT&T is a carrier. So this is just a really, really big deal as far as size, but also just the impact to the industry overall.

Rena Sherbill: I was going to say, is there any use to say, Netflix buys WBD, would you put it at like a 70% or there's truly no purpose in any of that? Let's all be patient.

Dan Rayburn: Nobody has an insight into any of that. And what happens if Paramount comes back and says, we'll now offer $35 a share?

Changes everything overnight. I don't know that they're going to do that. There's speculation out there, but yeah, I don't make guesses. I make educated bets based on data. And right now it's just too early. The other thing we don't know is, is this going to pass regulatory scrutiny? We can talk all day long as an industry or as investors about why it should happen or why it would be great or not great, but the deal has to get done.

The European Union is going have to look at this. The DOJ is going to look at it. Netflix own comments on the deal is 12 to 18 months to get done. They believe it will be. But remember WBD is not splitting out into two entities until the latest they've now said is Q3 of 2026.

And then you have to go through the regulatory process. This potentially, if it closes, this could be two plus years. Easy. So a lot's going to change in the industry in the next two years, two and a half years. I think it's just too early to speculate on any of it.

Rena Sherbill: And why does the EU weigh in, can you explain that?

Dan Rayburn: Yeah, the EU has to weigh in based on the percentage of your revenue that comes from Europe. And in this case, it's a large enough percentage to where the EU would have to approve the deal.

Historically, for listeners that don't know, the EU doesn't most times try and stop deals. Yeah, they do with iRobot (IRBTQ). There's been a couple cases here and there.

In many cases, the EU simply says, OK, we're not going to stop it or try to stop it, but it comes with some sort of terms of some kind. And that's not uncommon at all.

We saw that when Comcast (CMCSA) acquired NBC. There were terms to that deal where it was approved by the DOJ, but you have to adhere to certain terms. that tends to be how the EU does looks at mergers like this, but it's it's another unknown of many unknowns.

Rena Sherbill: Yes, many unknowns across the board. Do you think it's of value to go when we're talking about streaming company by company or sport by sport?

Dan Rayburn: Ooh, that's a hard one. Because some of these tie into multiple naturally. It's up to you. I don't know how you want to do it. Maybe sport is easier.

Rena Sherbill: Let's start NFL as we are December 23rd. Christmas games about to happen.

Dan Rayburn: Okay. NFL. Well, everybody who's a listener, who's an NFL fan already knows just how fragmented NFL streaming is and viewership is. It's just, it's all over the place in terms of where you go to get what type of content, the quality of the content that it's in.

There's a lot there to break down, but I would say the biggest thing that's fascinating right now about the NFL. We're recording this on Tuesday, December 23rd. And yesterday was an ESPN game, which brought additional data to the screen, which was interesting, a data enhanced game as they called it.

The key thing here for listeners is between December 25th, 27th, there's five NFL games that are going to be played. None will be broadcast nationally on TV. Netflix has two games on Christmas. Amazon (AMZN) has one. It's a triple header. Peacock has an exclusive game on Saturday the 27th. And then the NFL network has one.

So four of the five games are streaming exclusively on three different platforms. Now, of course, the games are OTA over the air. All NFL games are. And local NBC affiliates will show the exclusive game on. That's going to be on Peacock. But it just goes to show how much the NFL is relying on streaming services to get their games international and how the distribution model has changed over the last couple years.

Because broadcasters used to have these games on the holidays. Christmas, Black Friday, wild card games. They used to have all these. And they've been stripped out of their packages to sell to, from the NFL, license, I should say, to streaming platforms because of what they're willing to pay for it. You and I don't like that.

It makes consuming sports extremely difficult. But what consumers don't really understand is the sports leagues are not doing what's best for us They're not doing what's easy for us they're doing what makes them the most money for the league and the NFL has always been the most fragmented out there compared to say the NBA or Major League Baseball, although Major League Baseball with their new deals are gonna be fragmented as well

Rena Sherbill: And what are the numbers showing? Do we have that kind of data analysis to see if, well, for one, what are the numbers compared to regular broadcast games? Is that something that is an apples to apples comparison? Is that something that's done? And then B, is the sports coverage, is that leading to more subs? Is that leading to more revenue?

Dan Rayburn: Yeah, so you're asking the most important question here that we have in the industry, which is what is the impact of sports content on direct to consumer streaming services? And we don't have an answer.

And the reason we don't have an answer is because none of the sports streaming outlets and almost all the, or I should say leagues and all of the direct to consumer streaming services, almost none of them break out viewership in any kind and if they do it's so high level and vague where they don't define what a viewer is that we don't know what the impact is they don't mention things on churn and retention they don't even publicly disclose Netflix as a company has never publicly disclosed its churn to Wall Street ever in history so things like churn we don't know.

Rena Sherbill: Is that by design? Like, one would think that if they had something to brag about, they'd brag about it.

Dan Rayburn: I don't think it's that. It's definitions in the streaming industry are very difficult because unlike broadcast TV where we have standards, we don't have any standard in the streaming world.

There's nothing. We have for live events, simultaneous streams, AMA, average minute audience. You have monthly active users. No one defines it the same. Netflix just came out with a new metric they're calling monthly active viewers.

There's all, you have concurrent streams, you have concurrent devices, you have unique streams. There's all these different metrics and the companies don't use the same methodology. And then on top of that, when they are using Nielsen, which has some of the worst data out there, you have sports leagues calling out Nielsen publicly because they don't trust their data and yet they still use them.

And then Nielsen decided to change their methodology from what they used in previous years to something they call the big data plus panel measurement, which is not apples to apples, which everyone agrees. So how do you compare last year's viewership to this year's?

You can't. So it makes it also very hard to figure out what has viewership been over a long period of time. That's an issue. And then you have Netflix, their monthly active viewers, the way they define a monthly active viewer on their platform is any person who watched at least one minute of ads monthly. One minute. That's it.

And then they take that number and they multiply it by the estimated household of size. So basically how many people are on the couch? What's that reach? And that's their number. And that replaces what they call the MAU, monthly active viewers.

So it's interesting to see how Netflix comes out with that metric, but then Amazon a month ago at their unboxed event came out and said that Prime Video now reaches 315 monthly viewers globally. But it didn't define what a viewer is. So is a viewer, you watch two seconds, 10 seconds, one second, there's any football on Prime Video, you go to amazon.com's homepage, it loads in the upper right hand corner. If I don't click on it, if I don't engage with it, am I a viewer?

I don't know, Nielsen won't say. So part of the problem we have here and part of the problem investors have is it's very difficult to know what's actually being viewed and which platforms for what period of time.

Outside of a few services, for instance, NBC Sports is really good breaking out viewership specifically for Peacock when they do games for NFL. Fox doesn't break it out, but Peacock does, which is nice.

But what we don't get is, okay, that's how many AMA, average minute audience you had, but how long did people actually watch for? They won't say. So we have some pieces of data here and there, but ESPN won't break out what percentage is versus pay TV. So that causes an issue as well. So we have some numbers.

But we don't have enough details to truly know what's going on and to your real question is, what is the impact? Is that making more people sign up? And if so, is it also making them stay longer?

Rena Sherbill: I know you're not a financial analyst, but do you have an opinion on what metrics investors should be focused on for a company like Netflix, even Amazon, if you want to weigh in, or any other companies in the space, and then also how that dovetails with the metrics that you're focused on?

Dan Rayburn: Absolutely. So while I'm not a financial analyst, what I mean by that is I'm not giving out stock recommendations. I'm not putting out reports. I'm not a buyer, sell side, institutional money manager analyst, but I am looking at financial information all day.

I'm looking at SEC filings every single day. There's about 50 companies in my industry tied to sports media, entertainment, cloud infrastructure that I'm tracking that are public. And I'm reading every SEC filing that they put out. And the reason for that is there's a lot of really good information in the SEC filings that a lot of people just don't see because it's not in the press release. That includes cord cutting.

Companies don't put how many cord cutters they had, take Verizon (VZ). Verizon doesn't put in its press release how many pay TV subscribers it lost for residential customers because they don't want to highlight it. So you got to look at the SEC document. So I am constantly looking at financial information. Anybody who's looking at this space as an investor by this space, mean, DTC, Direct to Consumer Streaming Services knows that profitability is the biggest thing over the last 18, 24 months that the industry has moved to.

The whole get big FAST model that everybody had years ago and during COVID, that doesn't work anymore. There was a period of time where Disney's (DIS) DTC service was losing $100 million a day. There was one quarter where they lost $1.1 billion.

What happened over a couple of years was Wall Street then said, hey guys, forget growth at all costs, you got to get the profitability. Everybody's burning through too much money.

And what happened? WBD over time, D2C, it achieved that. Paramount, it achieved it. Disney, it achieved it. Now, Peacock is still losing money in terms of its D2C business, but it's almost there in terms of profitability. They also all define profitability differently as well, so you have to look at their definition of that.

But I would say the biggest thing investors want to look at, and one of the challenges is because it's being removed from most companies is ARPU, average revenue per user.

As an investor, would you rather have more subscribers that quarter at a lower ARPU or fewer subscribers at a higher ARPU? Naturally, the higher ARPU. It's making more money on the way to profitability. What's interesting is that Netflix, Disney, and a couple of the others, Roku, have stopped announcing ARPU. They're not giving investors that data anymore.

And part of the reasoning is, well, our business has changed so much because we now have subscription plus we have advertising. We have blended. We've got packages where we're bundling with other services where we're getting paid less in a wholesale rate.

I understand that, but it makes it much harder to track these companies from a financial standpoint when you don't have average revenue per user. Cause one of the things you have to think about is how does offering Black Friday deals impact ARPU when you can get 12 months at three or four or five dollars a month for that service.

Is the company actually making money on that? Chances are they're not. And that is part of the reason why this year, Peacock had no Black Friday deal. Smart. I know I saw online some consumers were like, man, that stinks. Like, where's the deal? It's smart for them because Peacock is still losing money.

But it goes to show investors should watch how content is packaged, how it's bundled, the price increases, and then also how much money is spent on content. We do get from Netflix and a few others, the total amount of money that they'll spend on content creation and licensing every year.

So for Netflix, it was about 18. It'll be about $18 billion this year. What you want to do is watch how that changes over time. What we don't get from Disney is a breakdown of their total content spend specific to streaming only versus broadcast.

They just lump it up into one large number, which really isn't too helpful. But investors should look at when they can, ARPU. They should look at content spend. They, over time, should look more at ad revenue. So very few companies right now break out the percentage of total DTC revenue that comes from subscription versus advertising, but a few do.

And over time, the demand is going to come from Wall Street to where even someone like Netflix is going to have to break that out. Because we know that's where the growth of revenue is coming over the next couple of years on the ad side, especially with Netflix with it being more targeted, owning their own ad stack.

So I would just say as investors, you really have to look at those metrics as opposed to a lot of what I see people sharing online every day, which is, you know, this service is better than this because they have this piece of content. But we don't know that that piece of content you're referencing to actually keeps subscribers.

Look how many shows get canceled after one season. Popularity doesn't always equal profitability. That is something I am telling investors all the time.

Rena Sherbill: And why not? Why isn't it an one to one? Because we just don't know enough of the specific numbers to extrapolate that correlation?

Dan Rayburn: We don't, but when Netflix comes out and says even though that show is popular or that series was popular, it didn't drive the engagement that we're looking to get based on the money it costs to produce it. What does that tell us? It's not a good investment of their dollars.

Now, we don't know the numbers exactly, but streaming services come out and made that very clear over the years in reference to very specific shows or series.

And what they're saying is the amount of money we spent on it simply doesn't warrant the feedback that we're getting as far as engagement. However, they define engagement.

Maybe that's new signups. Maybe that's keeping people on the platform. That could also be the number of ads or what the CPM is. They measure it in lot of different ways. But a lot of it is just based on viewership. And what a lot of people in the industry don't know is just...

What the actual viewership is for a lot of these events like world cup. Let's just use that for an instance. People talk about the world cup and how big it is and oh my God, it's this big streaming thing. It's not in 2022. The world cup streaming on Fox peaked at 1.28 million viewers. That's it. Now is the world cup huge on TV? Absolutely. It's one the largest things in the world on broadcast TV.

Streaming in the US on Fox, 1.28 million. That's really, really small. All the talk about Apple and F1, we have numbers from ESPN. The largest US television audience on record for Formula One was 1.5 million viewers AMA. Largest, 1.5. Races this year on ABC, ESPN, ESPN2 averaged 1.3 million viewers.

That's it. So, many don't know what is actually taking place. As far as viewership goes, they hear terms like F1 and Apple, NBA, right? And they assume that it's just huge, huge numbers out there. But the reality is a lot of these numbers are actually really, really low.

And that's why you have to look at the numbers as an investor. What is that viewership? Now, again, comparing it year over year can be difficult based on the metrics. But I bet a lot of our listeners don't know that Fox's stream of the World Cup only did 1.2 million at peak.

It's a low number. And then some companies don't put out anything. Now, the numbers thing too, super interesting here that we had a whole bunch of games during Thanksgiving holiday. None of the companies broke out who broadcast games during the Thanksgiving holiday. None of the companies broke out stats for streaming. None.

And I thought that was really interesting this year that none of them wanted to give out any numbers whatsoever.

Rena Sherbill: We had an analyst on a few months ago, Jack Bowman, talking about how Amazon Prime, everyone thinks that's a big money maker for Amazon, but it's actually a money loser, but a big brand amplifier for them. Is that this or is this that? Is, let's say YouTube TV and NBA and all of these things, F1 on Apple, are those brand amplifiers, but seems like not necessarily revenue boosters?

Dan Rayburn: In many cases it could be. I don't know the answer, neither does anybody else. You have to be at the company and be an insider to know. But I think the biggest question to ask here is, why does that matter?

If you're Apple (AAPL), doesn't matter whether you lose a billion dollars or two billion dollars a year off of the Apple TV streaming service. No. It's irrelevant to your balance sheet. You can afford to. And you're not in the business of content. That's not their core business.

So you have to look at their numbers very differently than Netflix because Netflix is in the business of content. They're not in the streaming business. Everybody says they're in a streaming business. They're not. Streaming is a technology.

Netflix is a content business who's using streaming technology as the distribution mechanism to get it to you and me. Apple's core business is not content. Prime Video, their core business is not content. It's commerce and advertising.

We would all love to know, industry analysts, Wall Street, everybody, we would love to know what is the actual cost to operate Prime Video and what does Amazon get in return either from advertising specifically inside Prime Video videos, all the additional potential revenue they get from people being Prime members that maybe keep the prime membership for the video.

Do they order more products? Amazon has more data on us than I think anyone outside of Google. So they know exactly what's working and what's not.

I think Wall Street gets too caught up on some of the companies where it's somebody had a report out I forget when saying that earlier in the year, well, Apple is losing $3 billion a year on Apple TV. So? That's a one-sided story.

What you're not saying is what are they getting for that $3 billion they're losing here. Are they selling more hardware? Are they getting more from the services business? So you have to look at these companies and the entire ecosystem they play in, and some play in just one realm.

Netflix does one thing. They're a content owner that distributes content via streaming technology. Now, okay, they're in the physical facilities business or whatever you want to call it because now they have a few physical locations you can go to.

But that's a very different business than say Disney or Amazon. So I think that's the way you have to look at the businesses and the finances is what is their core business? As opposed to, it's incredible how many times the media and analysts just want to compare Netflix streaming to Apple and then they say Apple's doing a terrible job and they're losing to Netflix.

They're not losing to Netflix. They've said, I don't know how many millions of times, we're not trying to be Netflix. It's not what we want to do.

And to me, it's the same way when people say, well, Netflix is losing to YouTube because YouTube TV has NFL Sunday ticket and Netflix doesn't. Netflix co-CEO Greg Peters came out, it was about a month ago. Not the first time they said this, but on stage he said that bidding on an entire season of NFL games doesn't make sense for them because he said that Netflix, quote, doesn't have a way to figure out the math to know if spending so much money on a season of NFL games would make sense for the business.

Investors should be listening to that because Netflix just said, we don't even know if we could measure the value of getting a full season NFL games at the cost we'd have to pay. They just said like, we don't know how to measure success or failure with that. Whether that's new subscribers, whether it's keeping people on the platform.

And that's part of the problem we have to your question is, we don't have some of these companies are measuring success, whether it's short or long term. Companies like YouTube, Amazon, some of the larger ones, Apple, they're playing the long game here. So even if they're losing money for multiple years in a row, they can afford to.

Rena Sherbill: How would you lay out why Apple is investing in Apple TV?

Dan Rayburn: Apples made it pretty clear when it comes to their strategy that they want to tell stories. What they keep saying is we want to tell stories. And for them storytelling is part of what Apple is all about. It's part of the brand and the culture, how they tell a story. Whether they're telling that to their mind in hardware, software, content, services, music, whatever it may be.

They very distinctively have called out the fact that they're cherry picking select stories that they can make that they feel they can add value to. They're not going for depth and breadth of catalog. And that has changed quite a lot over the industry.

For listeners who remember when Netflix came to the market, at one point when Netflix really started to grow its streaming library, when you went to Netflix website, it would talk about the number of titles they had for viewing. We now have 50,000 or 80,000 titles.

When Amazon launched in the market, it licensed a lot of the same content because back then there weren't a lot of exclusives, licensing deals. And then Amazon very quickly caught up to Netflix just in terms of depth and breadth of catalog. And you and I used to pick early on, most of us used to pick streaming services based on who had the most stuff, what options. Netflix then realized their differentiator was no longer going to be depth and breadth of content.

It was going to be original content. And they came out and told consumers, actually going forward, we're going to have less content, but we're going to have series like House of Cards and others that we are actually creating ourselves. And we think you'll still be happy with the content we have, even though it's fewer choices in the market. And what Netflix ended up doing was actually changing consumers' consumption habits.

Because today, do you know anyone who picks a streaming service based on whether they have 10,000, 50,000, or 100,000 hours of content, I doubt it. Maybe it's very niche, right? Some niche, know, crunchy roll, know, animation, things of that nature, makes sense. But consumer habits have changed over time.

And so that's the other thing to watch is, from an investment standpoint, is catalog, catalog of content. Because as your catalog changes, what also changes is your cost, either produce it or license it.

Rena Sherbill: And also, is it a matter of the content fitting the personality of the brand, to your point?

Dan Rayburn: I think it is. With Apple and MLS, when that deal was first announced, Apple came out and said that they liked that a lot of MLS fans were women. It was a demographic that they really wanted to help support and target. It was a younger demographic as well. They also got rights to the content globally. There were no blackout restrictions. You could come to one place to see every single game.

That's unheard of in today's market with the fragmentation of content. So that deal was very unique for them in a lot of ways. And yet, let's use that as an example. We now know in the last couple of months that the deal didn't work out between Apple and MLS as well as they thought it would. So MLS and Apple confirmed that they have changed their deal. The contract's gonna end three years earlier.

Apple's giving up its option to terminate the deal after the 2027 season. And also the payment terms between the companies have been altered. Nobody has released what they are, but the terms have changed.

In addition, you used to have to sign up for MLS season pass just to get the games. MLS season pass is no longer. It's gone. Starting next year, you're to be able to get all the games for free just through Apple TV. You don't have to have a second subscription.

So that's a great example of where you take a brand like Apple and everyone assumes whatever Apple does, well, it'll just work. Well, the two companies after a couple of years, both changed the deal on the terms and shortened it and changed the money and changed how they packaged it and brought it to consumers because they weren't getting the results that they'd hoped for.

Rena Sherbill: What else would you say about Netflix, Amazon, Apple, anything else you would add for those companies?

Dan Rayburn: I would say when it comes to NBA, because we didn't cover them, they recently did a new deal on the market where Prime Video and Peacock have a lot of those games this year.

And I would just say they've done a great job. The stream on Prime Video and Peacock has looked amazing. The video quality has been great. Some of the interactivity that they've done, the overlays. It's just been really, really good. I've been very impressed with them.

The NBA returned to NBC for the first time since 2002. The company had 5.6 million viewers AMA and peaked at 7.1 million for Peacock, which was great for opening night. So, you know, interesting take here because the NBA came out and publicly said that we do believe we should be on a couple other platforms with the new deal that they were working to secure, which they have.

But they actually called out the NFL to a degree and said, we don't think we should be on as many platforms as the NFL is.

And what they're really saying is they believe there's a sweet spot of let's add distribution through streaming services, but let's not make it so difficult for consumers that they can't figure out on what night and what day you have what event.

And I think the NAB has done a very good job in that regard. Whereas NFLs is fragmented as you can get and baseball is about the fragment again, because they just cut new deals.

And sorry for anyone who's a New York Yankees fan, but next year, to watch every Yankees game, you're gonna have to have eight broadcast channels and streaming platforms. Eight. That's just ridiculous.

Rena Sherbill: I knew people that tried to watch the World Series this year and couldn't. They thought that they were gonna be able to and weren't able to.

Dan Rayburn: They can, but they don't know where to get it and that's part of the problem here because now also you have what? You have new services in the market. You have Fox One. What does it get you? What does it not get you? A price point. Consumers can't remember.

And then you have ESPN. So you have the ESPN app, then you have ESPN Unlimited with a version of it, but then you have ESPN Plus. And then what do you get through authenticating if you're already a pay TV subscriber to ESPN?

So the amount of services in the market continues to grow and we didn't even talk next year there's going to be another streaming service which is the TNT sports app because HBO Max which has live sports today is losing all live sports next year in the US only and they'll be going over the TNT sports app but outside the US they're not losing sports so you know I feel bad for consumers honestly because I eat sleep and breathe this industry every single day to your point for almost 30 years. This is all I do.

And I pretty much know where everything is at any given time, but even I sometimes have to be like, man, what game is on what service tonight? But for the average consumer, it's frustrating. It's confusing. Sometimes it doesn't work. They can't log in. What are they paying for? Why is it not in high definition or 4k? Netflix, Christmas, NFL games will not be in HDR. Prime Video will be.

Difference in quality on the same day with the NFL on two different services. And that's so different than what you and I are used to on broadcast and pay TV. When we turn it on, no matter what city we're in, no matter what pay TV service we're on, we all get the same quality.

Streaming, that's not the case. So it's extremely confusing. The amount of text messages I get from friends and others of just, do I get this game on this date? I can't find it. It is extremely frustrating for sure.

Rena Sherbill: New frontiers, undoubtedly. Anything to say about Google (GOOG) (GOOGL) and YouTube? YouTube seems to be making a real play in the space.

Dan Rayburn: I would say just a few things on YouTube. So YouTube TV has, in the last week, we're have to put out a blog post saying that they are gonna be rolling out 10 new YouTube TV bundles in the new year.

Which was nice of them to tell us, but really not too helpful because they didn't tell us when they're rolling out, what the bundles are, or what they're gonna cost. I did see some of the media say, great, we can finally pay for only the channels we want.

Wrong. I'm here to tell you that is not the way it's gonna work.

I've already confirmed that with YouTube. You are not going to be able to pick just the four channels you want and pay for those four channels or what we call a la carte in the industry.

That is not what's coming. So anyone who's writing about that doesn't have this right. These are going to be packages. Now, are some of them going to be cheaper, you know, what we call skinny bundles because it'll have less content, but maybe more focused content? Totally possible. YouTube TV did call out they're going to have some specific sports packages.

But again, not knowing what it's going to be at what cost and what has blackout restrictions, it's really too hard to get excited. So I'm not sure why so many people in the media are just going crazy over this. Until we have the packages and the bundling, we really don't know much.

Outside of that, what YouTube is doing is really very different than what others in the market are doing as far as content. And there's this whole debate right now and has been for quite some time, which is absolutely silly, is YouTube TV? Is it not YouTube TV? Who cares?

TV is whatever the user defines. Whether it's a device or a service, it's whatever the user defines. And a lot of what people are getting wrong right now on YouTube is they're saying, well, YouTube is TV more so than ever because it recently got the exclusive rights for the Oscars. And, okay, that's cool and all, but you have to look at the entire deal in terms of what was actually announced.

Because as part of that deal, YouTube, I shouldn't say YouTube TV, YouTube is getting the Oscars. YouTube is also getting at least 10 other events that come with it. The Governor Awards, Oscar nomination announcements, all these other events that are not on TV. This will be from 2029 to 2029.

But in addition, this is a really big piece. There's something called the Google Arts and Culture Initiative. And this is a group at Google. And what they're going to do is they're going to help the Academy digitize components of their collection. And right now in the Academy, they say they more than 52 million items.

So part of this deal also involved Google taking just the amazing resources it has and platforming to archive a lot of the Academy's content and provide it, you know, in one place and one portal to see all this amazing great content. Like that's a huge part of the deal.

That's not something broadcast TV can do. So I also think for something like the Oscars and the content around the Academy, it's a great deal for YouTube as opposed to broadcast TV because when it comes to music, it crosses borders and genres and people and culture. Music resonates with lot of people around the world. There isn't a barrier.

When it comes to specific pieces of content, especially sports, there's a lot of content that we watch in the US or vice versa that other countries have no interest in. So YouTube TV and YouTube are really doing something different, YouTube in particular.

And then the final piece on YouTube, all the numbers people are throwing out, the Nielsen numbers, garbage, doesn't make sense because a lot of the numbers in terms of quote viewership, they're including reels or short pieces of content that are 10 or 15 seconds in length.

Why are we comparing a 15 second video to a 90 minute video on Netflix or a four hour length NFL game on broadcast TV? So a lot of the metrics in the industry are comparing apples to bowling balls. It's just, it's not even in the ballpark.

Rena Sherbill: Yeah, as we start to understand or just slowly evolve these industries into whatever they're becoming, I think so many people still want to, well, what is this? What column do we throw this in? Is it television? Is this broadcast? Is this, know, re-dub broadcast? this?

And it's just like, things are completely changing. We're breaking it down. They're being broken down. And I think what I'm starting to really understand throughout our conversations with you is how each company is bringing their own brand approach to it. The content, the approach, how they're servicing it, your point about the Oscars, like how many different tentacles they have as a part of that. It's super interesting if you don't want to get stuck in the old ways and put a box in a triangle.

I think it is really interesting to understand how this is developing and evolving. What would you leave with investors? I mean, first of all, happy for you to share anything that you feel like we should have shared or could have shared. But what would you say are your final words? If not, what would you say are your final words for investors and also consumers?

Dan Rayburn: So for investors that focus on this, there is no streaming war. War is an armed conflict. It's bad. These companies that we have in the market that are competing, that's a good thing.

Competition is good. It breeds different bundling and packaging and pricing, go-to-market strategies. All these headlines out there about Netflix won the streaming wars. Really? How do you figure that? And what are you measuring them on? Because Netflix is going to have more than $9 billion of free cash flow this year.

This comes down to looking at numbers. Everybody has an opinion, but it seems nobody wants to separate opinions from facts these days. And of course, I'm not surprised the media, they love writing for headlines. There's no streaming war. It makes it sound like there's only one winner.

There are multiple winners when it comes to the distribution of content. What they are all doing, whether it's music, podcasts, news, movies, they're all competing for our time, our eyeballs.

That's the biggest thing they're competing for. We only have a certain amount of time in the day to consume as much content as we want. So they're all competing, but many of them are different forms of content, different lengths, different quality.

You don't need a 4K video on your phone. So it comes down to the device. You ask the question of just TV and the way it's all bundled. There's no right or wrong answer, and people want to argue with each other about what is TV or what isn't.

TV is how you view content, whatever you define as TV. Some people will say TV has to be long form, it has to be professionally produced. Younger generation doesn't think that way. There's, for investors to understand, there's not a right or wrong here. There's not a one winner takes all. And that's something that the media loves pushing because the media loves highlighting losers. And it's like, there's only one winner.

That's not the reality in the market. We know that if you look at balance sheets. So I think that's really important to focus on. The second thing I would say is just listen to the number or look at the numbers.

Watch who you trust. It's just incredible to the misinformation that's in my industry. Don't trust anybody, including me. Like vet my numbers. Now I always say where I got them, but it's incredible how I'll see the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, pick whoever you want. And they'll say, well, you know, because Hulu has a hundred million subs. And it's like, no, Hulu has 54 million.

Where'd you come up with 100? Oh, well that was an estimate someone gave. Why are you using estimates? Disney is a public company. They break out the number of subs they have for Hulu every quarter.

So it's incredible how many times I see people writing comments on your website or just posts where just the actual factual numbers of how many subs exist or the ARPU or the fact that they don't realize in the SEC filing that Disney will say, the ARPU went down this year because of a wholesale deal with for instance, charter.

What does that mean? Well, it's wholesale. They're getting paid less per sub. They just told you that in the SEC filing, but of course it's not in the press release. So if you really want to understand this business, it's about understanding the fundamentals that really drive the business. And that starts with better understanding the numbers because numbers don't lie. Numbers tell the story. And facts are really important.

The amount of people who write content that say probably, likely, words that end in Y. What do they mean? Nothing. There's no concrete definition. So, it's part of the reason on LinkedIn I'm always pushing out content that says, here's the facts. These are the numbers. You can come argue if you want, but here's the link to the SEC filing. You can't argue with the numbers when it comes to the profitability.

Now, how they measure it, of course it's different. EBITDA, some of the different ways they all do it. Okay, different accounting principles there that they all do a little bit differently. But that's also something you have to understand as well.

If you're in the market, you have to understand the difference between how some of these numbers are reported, right? GAAP, non-GAAP, EBITDA, EPS, they don't mean the same thing. So I think for any investor, you just really need to educate yourself on the numbers.

Rena Sherbill: And the context of the industry, we just did a podcast last week about the cannabis rescheduling news and the importance of taking metrics in context in the cannabis industry. It's different than the numbers that are coming from the media industry. To your point, content is king and context also should be king.

Dan Rayburn: Context is key. And the thing I hate, obviously, as a former soldier too, is just the whole war thing. Like, just, it's not a war.

What we have is competition. The industry is great. And 20 years ago, for people that don't know the industry, weren't in the industry, man, the amount of advancements that came out literally every quarter, because one company was looking to outdo one another with better video quality back then, which, you know, didn't exist. It was amazing. It was fun. It was awesome. And that's still what we have today.

But it's not a war, it's just, really good, healthy competition.

Rena Sherbill: Yes, point taken and should be taken by all. Dan, where can people find your work, your thoughts?

Dan Rayburn: So I spend a lot of time, really all my time, just publishing free content on LinkedIn. So they can just search for me on LinkedIn. I'm pushing out, some days it's five to 10 pieces of content a day.

All of it is tied to numbers, facts. I talk to a lot of companies who give me information behind the scenes that I can put out. Some of it obviously is technical, tied to how streams work, bit rates, formats, video quality. I spend a lot of time on TV as well. CNBC, Schwab Network, Bloomberg TV, BBC News. My blog, it's streammediablog.com.

I tend to do longer pieces. I speak at a lot of events as well. But my job is one thing and one thing only, to inform, educate, and empower others. So everything I'm doing is free. I give out information for free. My cell phone number is listed on my blog and LinkedIn. Anyone has any questions at any time in the industry, they can call me free of charge.

So I talk to broadcasters, sports leagues, content owners, pay TV providers, institutional money managers, all the OTT platforms, vendors in the market. I'm fortunate to be in a position now where I can just spend all day just helping to educate people. That's my goal.

Rena Sherbill: Do you have a favorite audience to speak to?

Dan Rayburn: That's a good question. I would say I'd like talking to institutional money managers simply because the vast majority of them are not specialists.

They're generalists. So they have to track 50 companies in their portfolio. And so you can really educate them very well when it comes to what a couple companies are doing with information they're just not aware of because they don't really have the time to find it. I would say the other would be sports leagues.

Many of them give me an insight into what they're thinking. Not now, but what is the future of entertainment look like, whether it's on an airplane, getting a game, whether it's on mobile, and especially outside the US. We talk so much about streaming in the US, but it's incredible what the Zone and Fubo and some of these others are doing outside the US. There's amazing deployments and implementations.

One thing to keep in mind is, streaming is global, it's not just US centric. So I love talking to the sports leagues because they're always looking at many different ways their businesses can and are disrupted and over what period of time.

Rena Sherbill: Appreciate this conversation, Dan. Happy New Year, happy holidays. Thanks for coming on and sharing so much insight. Thank you for being so generous with your time and thoughts.

Dan Rayburn: Thank you. Appreciate it. Always love talking about this. Appreciate everyone listening. Any questions, reach out anytime.

A big slowdown in job growth … statistics and perspective on this pullback … gold miners are trading at discount valuations … two trades to consider
Before we jump in today, please note we’ll be taking a break tomorrow, Christmas Eve, and Thursday, Christmas Day, here in the Digest. We’ll pick back up on Friday, December 26. Now, today’s Digest…

This piece, from March 2025, came during a moment of market wobble – and it offered a calm, statistical reset on how normal such pullbacks truly are.

I chose it because two of the trades highlighted have since delivered strong moves: GDX is up approximately 115% since that original Digest (as of mid-December), and QQQ is up approximately 27% over the same period.

It’s a good reminder that disciplined investors often benefit when fear pushes others to the sidelines.

Have a good evening,

Jeff Remsburg

Job creation hit the brakes last month.

This morning, ADP’s private sector jobs report showed February’s gains clocked in at just 77,000 workers. That’s miles beneath January’s revised number of 186,000 and substantially lower than the consensus estimate of 148,000.

For what’s behind the slowdown, here’s Nela Richardson, ADP’s chief economist:

Policy uncertainty and a slowdown in consumer spending might have led to layoffs or a slowdown in hiring last month.

Our data, combined with other recent indicators, suggests a hiring hesitancy among employers as they assess the economic climate ahead.

As we’ve been highlighting here in the Digest, “uncertainty” is the big market overhang today.

Will President Trump’s tariffs be fleeting or long-term? How will they impact corporate profits? How will they affect consumer spending? How will they influence inflation and the Fed’s interest rate policy?

This swirl of questions has weighed on the market since mid-February.

As we’re going to press, we’re getting welcomed news that’s helping the market
President Trump has given a one-month tariff exemption to the big three U.S. automakers.

From Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt:

Reciprocal tariffs will still go into effect on April 2, but at the request of the companies associated with USMCA, the president is giving them an exemption for one month so they are not at an economic disadvantage.

Stocks are rallying on the news. The hope is that this is a foreshadowing of additional tariff leniency to come.

Meanwhile, earlier today, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick suggested the Trump administration could scale back tariffs on Canadian and Mexican goods. An announcement with more details could come as soon as this afternoon. As we go to press, that update hasn’t arrived.

But even if that announcement comes, a “scale back” isn’t a “removal.” And so, the impact of scaled-back-yet-sustained tariffs remains an uncertainty…which Wall Street hates.

Returning to jobs, the most important report comes on Friday with the Labor Department’s Bureau of Labor Statistics report on nonfarm payrolls. It could be a market mover.

We’ll report back.

One thing to remember if the recent market drawdown has you feeling rattled…
It’s normal.

As I write, the S&P is down about 5% from its high. This doesn’t even register as a “correction,” as defined by “down 10% from the most recent high.”

So, in the grand scheme of things, this is far less a massive 10-car pileup, and more so the slightest of parking lot fender benders.

But what if we get a 10% correction, or even something a bit deeper?

Such pullbacks are commonplace in Wall Street’s long history. Here’s some perspective from Kiplinger:

Since the 1950s, the S&P 500 has experienced around 38 market corrections. That means that historically speaking, the S&P 500 has experienced a correction every 1.84 years.

Considering that the S&P’s last correction came in 2022, we’re basically right on schedule.

And how long should we be prepared to endure this?

Obviously, no one knows. But American Century Investments crunched the numbers and found that if this pullback reaches “correction” territory but doesn’t slip into a full bear market, then, on average, we’re in for a 14% drawdown that will last about four months.

How do you manage your portfolio during such a drawdown?

A study of market history shows that the best thing to do is ignore it.

Of course, if your specific investment timeline and/or financial situation requires you to pull your money out of the market, do what you must. But if you’re investing for a longer period, log out of your brokerage account and go live your life as you wait for the inevitable rebound.

Here’s Schwab with perspective on that eventual bounce:

Occasional pullbacks have historically been followed by rebounds, according to the Schwab Center for Financial Research.

Since 1974, the S&P 500 has risen an average of more than 8% one month after a market correction bottom and more than 24% one year later.

Schwab delved into additional historical data on corrections, concluding:

Despite these pullbacks, however, stocks rose in most years, with positive returns in all but 3 years and an average gain of approximately 7%.

This brings to mind the 2025 market forecast from our hypergrowth expert Luke Lango, editor of Innovation Investor:

We think this will be the pattern for the stock market for the foreseeable future: two steps forward, one step back. Lather, rinse, repeat. 

And yet, I still think stocks are going higher in 2025.

Bottom line: Pullbacks like the one we’ve been experiencing today are 100% normal. Take it in stride.

A different way to play the gold bull market
As I write Wednesday, the yellow metal is barely 0.3% below a new all-time high.

But rather than discuss investing in gold today, let’s highlight gold miners. You can think of this as investing in gold, yet with operating leverage. 

You see, there’s something strange happening with miners today…

While gold’s price has been hitting new highs in recent months, sentiment toward miners has been lukewarm at best. This is resulting in valuations near historic lows.

Here’s Barron’s from February:

Gold stocks, despite their gains, really do look like bargains.

The VanEck ETF trades at just over 12 times 12-month forward earnings, a 44% discount to the S&P 500’s 22 times, a much wider gap than the 10-year average of 20%.

Narrowing the price/earnings gap to that average discount would bring the ETF up to just over 16 times, landing it, once again, at $51.

Let’s get a visual on this inconsistency between gold and miners.

As you can see below, since spring 2022, while gold has climbed almost 50%, gold miners, as represented by the VanEck Gold Miners ETF, GDX, are basically flat.

(Disclosure: I own GDX.)

This is abnormal. Typically, top-tier gold mining stocks make moves that are 2X- 3X the size of gold’s move. This reflects the swelling profits that miners enjoy as gold’s market price rises above breakeven costs…or the snowballing losses they suffer when prices swing the opposite way.

Recently, miners haven’t been commanding this premium. Here’s Mining.com:

The gold miners’ stock prices have largely decoupled from their metal, which overwhelmingly drives their profits.

This fundamental disconnect has spawned a shocking valuation anomaly, with gold stocks far too low relative to gold. But this aberration won’t last, as markets abhor extreme deviations from precedent.

Mean reversions and proportional overshoots soon follow, so gold stocks will soar to reflect their record earnings.

But why are miners lagging so badly?
First, miners usually sell their gold based on long-term contracts or hedging strategies. This creates a lag in profits even as gold hits all-time highs.

Beyond that, the question is usually better answered on a case-by-case basis. But here are some of the top reasons why miners are lagging:

They’ve faced higher operating costs due to inflation
Environmental and regulatory costs have also increased
Some miners have a history of poor capital allocation (bad acquisitions, excessive debt, shareholder dilution)
Many mines operate in politically unstable regions, leading to supply chain disruptions, government intervention, or nationalization risks

Remember to do your due diligence and be discerning about which miners you buy, but the opportunity today looks compelling.

For your own research, I’d recommend looking at Agnico Eagle Mines (AEM) and Alamos Gold (AGI). They’re generating enormous free cash flow today. And, of course, there’s GDX, which gives you exposure to a basket of top miners.

Finally, are you feeling courageous?
One of Warren Buffett’s most famous quotes is to “be fearful when others are greedy and to be greedy only when others are fearful.”

Well, we’ve got the “Fear” part covered.

Even though stocks are up as I write Wednesday, CNN’s Fear & Greed Index puts us at “Extreme Fear.”

So, are you ready to be greedy?

If so, here’s an idea…

According to TrendSpider, the trade is to buy QQQ (a fund that tracks the Nasdaq 100) when its price is 10%+ off its 20-week range high.

In the last 10 years, when following this entry signal, the average returns six months later have been 13.5% with an 82% win-rate.

Here’s the chart from TrendSpider.

For another idea, I’d point you to our global macro expert, Eric Fry, the editor behind Leverage
In Leverage, Eric recommends LEAPS trades, which stand for “Long-Term Equity Anticipation Security.” You can think of this as an option with a longer-dated expiration, usually lasting from one to three years.

One of the main reasons to use LEAPS is because of the “leverage” they afford investors. As Eric writes, you “put down a small investment to control a large amount of stock.”

As an example of the potential payoff, in February, Leverage subscribers locked in gains of nearly 300% on their Dutch Bros. Inc. (BROS) call options that they opened in July 2024.

Now, also in February, Eric recommended a miner that he called a “hidden” gold play.

From Eric:

[This miner’s] relatively low valuation underscores its identity as a hidden gold play.

Its shares are trading for just six times gross earnings (EBITDA), which is 40% lower than the valuation of the Philadelphia Gold and Silver Index (XAU) stocks.

Since that recommendation, this stock has fallen slightly in sympathy with the broad market. But this is offering investors an even better entry price on what could be a monster trade if gold mining stocks roar higher as history suggests they’re likely to do. (As of mid-December, the stock is up about 70%.)

If jumping into QQQ or Eric’s “hidden” gold trade makes you nervous…
That’s totally normal.

But here are a few words of wisdom from wise (and very successful) investors who have gone before us.

From billionaire Rob Arnott, founder and chairman of the board of Research Affiliates:

In investing, what is comfortable is rarely profitable.

And J.P. Morgan:

In bear markets, stocks return to their rightful owners.

Finally, Cullen Roche:

The stock market is the only market where things go on sale and all the customers run out of the store.

Bottom line: Don’t take on more risk than is appropriate for you and your financial situation, but recognize that one investor’s panic sale is another investor’s bargain entry price.

Have a good evening,

Jeff Remsburg