Anthropic and OpenAI Have Single-Handedly Severed the Logic of Pre-IPO Stock Tokenization

marsbitPublicado a 2026-05-12Actualizado a 2026-05-12

Resumen

The pre-IPO stock token market is experiencing significant turmoil following strong statements from AI giants Anthropic and OpenAI. Both companies have updated their official policies, declaring that any transfer of their company shares—including sales, transfers, or assignments of share interests—without prior board approval is "invalid" and will not be recognized in their corporate records. This means buyers in such unauthorized transactions would not be recognized as shareholders and would have no shareholder rights. A major point of contention is the use of Special Purpose Vehicles (SPVs), which are legal entities commonly used by pre-IPO token platforms to pool investor funds and indirectly acquire shares from employees or early investors. The companies explicitly state they do not permit SPVs to acquire their shares, and any such transfer violates their restrictions. They warn that third parties selling shares through SPVs, direct sales, forward contracts, or stock tokens are likely engaged in fraud or are offering worthless investments due to these transfer limits. This stance directly threatens the core model of many pre-IPO token platforms, which rely on SPV structures. The announcement revealed additional risks within this model, such as complex "SPV-within-SPV" layering that obscures legal transparency, increases management fees, and creates a chain reaction risk of invalidation. Following the news, tokens like ANTHROPIC and OPENAI on platforms like PreStocks fel...

Original | Odaily Planet Daily (@OdailyChina)

Author | Azuma (@azuma_eth)

The pre-IPO stock token market has just experienced a severe shockwave. The epicenter of this earthquake comes from two statements issued by AI giants Anthropic and OpenAI.

Anthropic and OpenAI Successively State They "Do Not Recognize" Unauthorized Transfers

Today, Anthropic updated an official statement it released in February titled "On Unauthorized Anthropic Stock Sales and Investment Scams."

In the article, Anthropic explicitly stated: "Any sale or transfer of Anthropic stock, or disposition of an interest in Anthropic stock, that has not been approved by our board of directors, is invalid (note the use of 'invalid') and will not be recognized on the company's books and records. This means that if anyone sells Anthropic stock without board approval, the transaction will be deemed invalid. The purported buyer will not be recognized as an Anthropic shareholder and will not enjoy any shareholder rights."

Shortly after Anthropic updated its statement, OpenAI also followed up with an announcement stating: "All equity interests are subject to transfer restrictions. No shares may be transferred directly or indirectly without the written consent of the company. Any sale without consent is not only unauthorized but also invalid."

In their announcements, both Anthropic and OpenAI explained that the companies' preferred and common stock are subject to transfer restrictions stipulated in their charters, meaning all stock transfers require board approval.

Anthropic also emphasized, "The company also does not permit the acquisition of Anthropic shares by 'Special Purpose Vehicles' (SPVs). Any transfer of shares to an SPV violates the company's transfer restrictions... Some investment funds may claim to offer indirect access to Anthropic shares, but these funds are likely attempting to circumvent transfer restrictions. Therefore, any third party claiming to sell Anthropic shares to the public — whether through direct sales, forward contracts, stock tokens, or other mechanisms — may be involved in fraud or offering worthless investments due to Anthropic's transfer restrictions."

  • Odaily Note: The image shows unauthorized equity transfer platforms named by Anthropic.

What is an SPV?

To understand why this update has had such a massive impact on the pre-IPO stock token market, one must first understand what an SPV is.

In traditional pre-IPO stock trading, directly transferring original shares is extremely difficult, restricted not only by company charters but also involving complex legal procedures. In this context, SPVs emerged.

An SPV is a legal entity established specifically for a particular transaction or investment purpose. It can be understood as a 'shell company dedicated to holding a specific asset.' Multiple investors can indirectly hold shares in a company or a certain asset by contributing capital to the same SPV, achieving goals such as centralized ownership, lowered entry barriers, and optimized legal and tax structures. SPVs are particularly common in popular pre-IPO stock trading. Since many high-profile companies are often unwilling to directly introduce numerous small shareholders, institutions typically first set up an SPV, which then uniformly invests in the target company.

For example, so-called "early participation in Anthropic or OpenAI share subscriptions" in the market essentially involves investors first contributing capital to an SPV, which then purchases the unlisted equity of Anthropic or OpenAI.

Currently, most pre-IPO stock token platforms (such as Prestock) adopt the SPV structure.

  • The platform or its partners will register an SPV in a certain jurisdiction. The sole purpose of this SPV is to buy original Anthropic shares in the secondary market (usually from employees or early investors).
  • The platform will then issue derivative tokens on-chain (e.g., ANTHROPIC or OPENAI), which are legally defined in agreements as "claims to the economic benefits of that SPV."
  • Theoretically, these tokens are 1:1 pegged to the original shares. For every token issued, the underlying SPV should hold a corresponding share of stock.

The problem now is that Anthropic and OpenAI have now explicitly stated they 'do not recognize unauthorized stock transfers.' This means if an SPV transfers stock without board approval (which is highly unlikely to be granted), the stock held by that SPV may be considered invalid in the eyes of Anthropic and OpenAI. If the stock held by the SPV is invalid, then the "economic benefits" referenced by the on-chain tokens become worthless.

The Risk of SPV "Nesting"

A significant reason for Anthropic and OpenAI's strong opposition to SPVs is the growing risk of over-financialization as their pre-IPO stock tokens continue to be hotly traded (Anthropic's pre-IPO valuation once soared to $1.4 trillion, far exceeding its last funding round valuation).

Among these risks, the "nesting" of SPVs is most concerning — many investors buying pre-IPO stock tokens believe they are purchasing company shares, but are actually only buying claims to the economic benefits of an SPV. More exaggeratedly, many SPVs do not directly hold Anthropic's original shares but are instead nested two or three SPV layers down.

This "nesting" structure is, in fact, very dangerous.

  • Legal Transparency Issues: With each additional layer, the authenticity of the underlying assets becomes more blurred. Investors find it difficult to confirm whether the bottom-most SPV has actually obtained the company's board transfer approval.
  • Management Fee Exploitation: Each layer of SPV charges management fees, performance fees, and dividends. After layer-by-layer skimming, investors' actual returns are severely diluted.
  • Zeroing Risk: If the equity transfer at any layer is deemed "invalid" by Anthropic, the entire value chain could instantly collapse.

Whether for reputational reasons or investor protection, Anthropic and OpenAI clearly do not want to see this situation.

Pre-IPO Stock Tokens Plummet, Contracts Remain Relatively Stable

Once the announcements from Anthropic and OpenAI spread, the market immediately reacted.

ANTHROPIC on PreStocks plunged sharply, falling below $1,000 at its lowest, temporarily reported at $1,082 as of 12:00, down 20.62% for the day; OPENAI was temporarily reported at $1,440, down 26.82% for the day.

Investor panic is easily understood. Since Anthropic and OpenAI explicitly stated they do not recognize unauthorized shareholdings, the "rights" behind these tokens face the probability of becoming "worthless paper." Holders may confront significant claim validation risks and legal litigation costs.

Interestingly, while pre-IPO stock tokens came under pressure, another type of pre-IPO stock trading product performed relatively stably — pre-IPO contracts that rely entirely on market-driven bilateral betting. The reason for this is that such products do not hold any real stock; Anthropic and OpenAI's restrictions have no effect on them. They are essentially "bilateral betting pools" on future IPO prices, relying on price competition between buyers and sellers.

Predictions for Future Direction

In response to Anthropic and OpenAI's "non-recognition" statements, two distinctly different voices have emerged in the industry.

Some believe the logic of pre-IPO tokenized stock trading is dead. If headliners like Anthropic and OpenAI are leading the charge to ban SPVs, other giants may follow suit. With equity backing being questioned, the value of so-called pre-IPO stock tokens is in doubt.

However, others, including Rivet founder Nick Abouzeid, believe this is not a cause for alarm. Trading pre-IPO stock tokens through unofficial channels was always a gamble; buyers should have had the awareness from day one that the "company might not recognize" the shares. What you lack is direct investment opportunity; obtaining that opportunity through other channels always carries certain risks.

In summary, at a time when premiums for pre-IPO stock tokens have continued to expand and market sentiment has grown increasingly feverish, Anthropic and OpenAI's statements undoubtedly pour cold water on the entire sector.

Over the past few months, more and more investors have begun viewing pre-IPO stock tokens as a 'low-barrier channel to participate in the growth of top AI companies.' Valuations for some AI-concept pre-IPO stock tokens have significantly detached from reality, with even crazy speculation far exceeding the valuations of the last funding rounds. Against this backdrop, the public "debunking" by Anthropic and OpenAI, in a way, is also about redrawing the boundaries for this wildly growing new market.

For speculators, this is a lesson in risk; but for the long-term development of the industry, the market may also need such a moment of "de-bubbling."

Preguntas relacionadas

QAccording to the article, what did Anthropic and OpenAI announce regarding unauthorized stock transfers?

ABoth Anthropic and OpenAI announced that any sale or transfer of their company stock without board approval is unauthorized and invalid. They will not recognize such transactions on their books, meaning buyers of such shares will not be considered shareholders and will have no shareholder rights.

QWhat is an SPV, and how was it typically used in the pre-IPO stock token market as described?

AAn SPV (Special Purpose Vehicle) is a legal entity created for a specific transaction or investment. In the pre-IPO token market, platforms would use an SPV to purchase company stock (e.g., from employees). They would then issue tokens on a blockchain, which represented a claim on the economic benefits of that SPV, theoretically 1:1 with the underlying shares.

QWhy does the article consider the multi-layered 'nesting' of SPVs particularly risky?

AMulti-layered 'nesting' of SPVs is risky because it obscures the transparency of the underlying asset, makes it hard to verify if the transfer was authorized, involves multiple layers of fees that dilute investor returns, and creates a chain where if any one transfer is deemed invalid by the company, the entire value chain can collapse.

QHow did the market react to the announcements from Anthropic and OpenAI, particularly concerning different types of pre-IPO products?

AThe market reacted negatively to pre-IPO stock tokens based on SPV structures. For example, ANTHROPIC and OPENAI tokens on PreStocks saw significant price drops (over 20%). However, pre-IPO contracts, which are purely speculative bilateral bets on future IPO prices and do not hold actual stock, remained relatively stable as they were unaffected by the companies' transfer restrictions.

QWhat are the two contrasting viewpoints presented in the article regarding the future of the pre-IPO stock token market after these announcements?

AOne viewpoint is that the logic behind pre-IPO token trading is dead, as other major companies might follow Anthropic and OpenAI's lead, undermining the value of tokens without recognized underlying equity. The other viewpoint, from figures like Nick Abouzeid, is that this was always a known risk when buying through unofficial channels, and investors should have been aware that the company might not recognize such holdings from the start.

Lecturas Relacionadas

Agents Take Over Traffic Distribution Power: What Are Tencent, ByteDance, and Alibaba Competing For?

In the race to dominate the AI era's entry point, China's tech giants—Tencent, ByteDance, and Alibaba—are aggressively deploying AI Agents to control the future of traffic distribution. Alibaba is pursuing a dual-track "closed loop + openness" strategy. Its Qianwen app is evolving into a super-Agent integrated across its ecosystem (Taobao, Alipay, etc.) to handle complex tasks like travel planning. Concurrently, it is opening its platform to external brands (Luckin Coffee, KFC) and has launched a B2B Agent platform, "Wukong," targeting enterprise automation. Its other flagship, Quark, aims to be an "AI super search box" for information and tasks. ByteDance is executing an omnipresent "sprawl strategy." Its Doubao app boasts over 300 million monthly active users and is evolving into a default AI entry point for daily life, with plans for paid versions and e-commerce integration. Its core weapon is the Kouzi platform, a visual "AI assembly factory" for developers to build custom Agents. ByteDance is also pushing hardware integration, collaborating on AI phones and developing smart glasses to embed Doubao everywhere. Tencent is playing its long-held "ultimate card" by quietly embedding an AI Agent directly into WeChat. This Agent, accessible via a swipe, can understand user commands and automatically execute tasks by calling upon WeChat's millions of mini-programs (e.g., finding and ordering coffee). This leverages WeChat's unparalleled 1.4-billion-user ecosystem to position the app as an AI-powered "service operating system," a move that could dramatically reshape the competitive landscape. The core battleground is shifting from competing for "user screen time" to competing to be the "default execution layer" for user intent. The business model is evolving from an "attention economy" to an "intent economy," where the Agent that can most efficiently fulfill a user's need gains control over service access and token flow. This represents a fundamental change in how users connect with digital services, making the fight for the Agent入口 (entry point) a pivotal moment for redefining industry leadership in the AI age.

marsbitHace 30 min(s)

Agents Take Over Traffic Distribution Power: What Are Tencent, ByteDance, and Alibaba Competing For?

marsbitHace 30 min(s)

From Banning Doubao to Embracing Honor: Why Did WeChat Suddenly 'Change Its Face'?

The article explores the sudden shift in WeChat's strategy towards AI assistants from mobile phone manufacturers, transitioning from strict opposition to active collaboration. For over a year, WeChat fiercely resisted attempts by phone AI assistants (like ByteDance's Doubao in late 2025) to control its features via GUI automation ("simulated clicking"), citing security and data control concerns. This stance created a significant barrier for system-level AI integration. Now, Tencent has initiated A2A (Agent-to-Agent) partnerships with major phone brands like Honor, Xiaomi, OPPO, and vivo. This model allows a phone's system AI (e.g., Honor's YOYO) to parse a user's voice command and send a structured request directly to WeChat's own internal AI agent via secure APIs. WeChat then executes the action (e.g., sending a message) and returns the result. The article attributes Tencent's "change of face" to strategic pressure. While leading in social app usage, Tencent trails rivals like ByteDance and Alibaba in standalone AI app popularity. WeChat, with its vast mini-program ecosystem, is Tencent's key asset for an AI comeback. The upcoming WeChat AI agent aims to handle tasks like booking and payments within the app. However, phone system assistants remain the primary AI entry point for most users. The A2A collaboration allows Tencent to extend WeChat's AI reach to this crucial system layer while maintaining control over its core functions and data. For phone manufacturers, embracing A2A is a pragmatic move. The GUI route proved unviable due to WeChat's blocks. A2A offers a compliant path to integrate a vital service, enhancing their AI assistants' usefulness. It allows them to focus on developing their own AI ecosystems for other services while cooperating on WeChat access. The collaboration is framed as a mutual, strategic necessity: Tencent gains a distribution channel, and manufacturers gain a key functionality. The partnership relies on a "dual authorization" mechanism for security, requiring both user and app consent for each action. While questions about long-term data privacy practices remain, experts note A2A is more secure and compliant than GUI automation. Ultimately, this cooperation is seen as a tentative, calculated truce. Tencent's long-term goal is to make WeChat an AI-powered "service OS." Phone manufacturers aim to make their system AI the central user interface. Their paths may converge or clash in the future, but for now, the A2A deal represents the opening chapter in the battle for the AI-era user入口, driven by necessity and strategic calculus on both sides.

marsbitHace 2 hora(s)

From Banning Doubao to Embracing Honor: Why Did WeChat Suddenly 'Change Its Face'?

marsbitHace 2 hora(s)

Trading

Spot
Futuros
活动图片