Anthropic and OpenAI Personally Sever the Logic of Pre-IPO Crypto-Stocks

Odaily星球日报Publicado em 2026-05-12Última atualização em 2026-05-12

Resumo

The pre-IPO token market has been rocked by strong statements from Anthropic and OpenAI. Both AI giants have updated official warnings, declaring that any sale or transfer of their company shares without explicit board approval is "invalid" and will not be recognized on their corporate records. This directly targets Special Purpose Vehicles (SPVs), the common legal structure used by pre-IPO token platforms. These platforms typically use an SPV to acquire shares from employees or early investors, then issue blockchain-based tokens representing a claim on the SPV's economic benefits. Anthropic and OpenAI's position means that if an SPV's share purchase lacked authorization, the underlying asset could be deemed worthless, nullifying the token's value. Anthropic explicitly warned that any third party selling its shares—via direct sales, forwards, or tokens—is likely fraudulent or offering a valueless investment. The crackdown highlights risks in the popular SPV model, including complex multi-layered "Russian doll" SPV structures that obscure legal ownership, add fees, and concentrate risk. If one layer is invalidated, the entire chain could collapse. Following the announcements, tokens like ANTHROPIC and OPENAI on platforms like PreStocks fell sharply (over 20%). In contrast, purely speculative pre-IPO prediction contracts remained stable, as they involve no actual share ownership. The move is seen as a corrective measure amid a market frenzy where some pre-IPO token valuation...

Original | Odaily Planet Daily (@OdailyChina)

Author | Azuma (@azuma_eth)

The pre-IPO (Pre-IPO) stock token market has just experienced a severe shock. The epicenter of this earthquake stems from two statements issued by two major AI companies, Anthropic and OpenAI.

Anthropic and OpenAI Successively Declare They 'Do Not Acknowledge' Unauthorized Sales

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

Anthropic explicitly stated in the article: "Any sale or transfer of Anthropic stock that is not approved by our Board of Directors, or any disposition of economic interests in Anthropic stock, is invalid (note the term 'invalid') and will not be recognized on the company's books and records. This means that if someone sells Anthropic stock without board approval, the transaction will be deemed invalid. The purported buyer will not be recognized as a shareholder of Anthropic and will not enjoy any shareholder rights."

Shortly after Anthropic updated its statement, OpenAI also followed up with an announcement stating: "All equity is subject to transfer restrictions. No shares may be transferred, directly or indirectly, without the Company's written consent. 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 shares are subject to transfer restrictions stipulated in their charters, meaning all stock transfers require board consent.

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

Odaily Note: The image shows platforms named by Anthropic for unauthorized equity transfers.

What is an SPV?

To understand why this update has 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 separately for a specific transaction or investment purpose, which can be understood as a 'shell company specifically used to hold a certain asset' — multiple investors can indirectly hold shares in a company or a type of asset by contributing capital to the same SPV, thereby achieving centralized ownership, lowering entry barriers, and optimizing legal and tax structures. SPVs are especially common in popular pre-IPO stock trades. As many star companies are often unwilling to directly introduce a large number of small shareholders, institutions typically first establish an SPV, which then uniformly invests in the target company.

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

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

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

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

The Risk of SPV "Nesting"

A significant reason why Anthropic and OpenAI are so resistant to SPVs is that with the ongoing speculative frenzy around their pre-IPO stock tokens (Anthropic's pre-IPO valuation once soared to $1.4 trillion, far higher than its last funding round valuation), the risk of SPVs becoming over-financialized has begun to surface.

Among these risks, the "nesting" problem of SPVs is most noteworthy — many investors buying pre-IPO stock tokens believe they are purchasing company shares, but in reality, they only hold claims to the economic benefits of some SPV. Even more exaggeratedly, many SPVs do not directly hold Anthropic's original shares but are themselves 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 asset becomes more ambiguous. Investors find it difficult to confirm whether the SPV at the very bottom has actually received board approval for the transfer.
Management Fee Exploitation: Each SPV layer charges management fees, performance fees, and dividends. After layers of skimming, investors' actual returns are severely diluted.
Risk of Wipeout: If the equity transfer at any layer is deemed "invalid" by Anthropic, the entire value chain can collapse instantly.

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

Pre-IPO Stock Tokens Plunge, Contracts Remain Relatively Stable

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

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

Investors' panic is easily understood. Since Anthropic and OpenAI explicitly stated they do not acknowledge unauthorized holdings, the "rights" behind these tokens face the probability of becoming "worthless paper," and holders may face significant risks in confirming ownership and legal litigation costs.

Interestingly, while pre-IPO stock tokens were under pressure, another type of pre-IPO trading product performed relatively stably — pre-IPO contracts that rely entirely on market bilateral speculation. This is because such products do not inherently hold any real stock; the restrictions by Anthropic and OpenAI have no direct impact on them. They are essentially "bilateral bets" on the future IPO price, relying on price competition between buyers and sellers.

Future Trend Predictions

Facing Anthropic and OpenAI's "non-acknowledgment" stance, two contrasting voices have emerged within the industry.

Some believe the logic of pre-IPO crypto-stock trading is dead. If headliners like Anthropic and OpenAI take the lead in banning SPVs, other giants may follow suit. With the backing of equity rights being shaken, whether pre-IPO stock tokens still hold value is questionable.

However, others, including Rivet founder Nick Abouzeid, believe this is not a big deal. Trading pre-IPO stock tokens through unofficial channels is inherently a gamble; buyers should have been prepared for the possibility that the "company would not acknowledge" them from day one — what you lack is direct investment opportunities; obtaining such opportunities through other means always carries certain risks.

In summary, with the continuous expansion of pre-IPO stock token premiums and increasingly fervent market sentiment, the stance of Anthropic and OpenAI undoubtedly pours a bucket of cold water on the entire sector.

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

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

Perguntas relacionadas

QWhat did Anthropic and OpenAI declare regarding the transfer of their stocks?

ABoth Anthropic and OpenAI declared that any transfer or sale of their company stock without the express approval of their respective boards of directors is unauthorized and considered 'invalid.' They will not recognize such transfers on their company books and records, meaning buyers in these unauthorized transactions would not be considered shareholders and would have no shareholder rights.

QWhat is an SPV (Special Purpose Vehicle) and what is its role in pre-IPO stock token trading?

AA Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) is a legal entity created for a specific transaction or investment purpose, often acting as a 'shell company' to hold an asset. In pre-IPO stock token trading, platforms use SPVs to indirectly acquire shares of a target company (like Anthropic) from employees or early investors. The platform then issues blockchain tokens representing a claim on the economic benefits of the SPV, theoretically pegged 1:1 to the underlying shares.

QWhy did the announcements by Anthropic and OpenAI cause a significant drop in the price of pre-IPO stock tokens?

AThe announcements caused a significant price drop because they fundamentally questioned the value of the underlying assets. By declaring unauthorized stock transfers 'invalid,' Anthropic and OpenAI implied that the shares held by the SPVs backing the tokens might be worthless. This creates substantial legal and ownership risks for token holders, leading to panic selling and a loss of confidence in these instruments.

QWhat is the 'nesting doll' risk associated with SPVs mentioned in the article?

AThe 'nesting doll' risk refers to a structure where an SPV does not directly hold the target company's shares but instead holds interests in other SPVs, which themselves may hold shares or interests in further SPVs. This creates several dangers: it obscures the true ownership and validity of the underlying shares, subjects investor returns to multiple layers of management fees, and increases the risk of total loss ('going to zero') if any layer in the chain is deemed invalid by the target company.

QAccording to the article, how did pre-IPO stock futures contracts react compared to the token market after the announcements?

AAccording to the article, pre-IPO stock futures contracts remained relatively stable compared to the collapsing token market. This is because these futures contracts are purely speculative derivatives based on the future IPO price and do not involve any claim on or holding of the actual company shares. Therefore, they were not directly affected by Anthropic's and OpenAI's statements regarding the invalidity of unauthorized share transfers.

Leituras Relacionadas

The Value Distribution of Stablecoins

**Summary: The Value Distribution of Stablecoins** The article argues that stablecoins are evolving from mere trading tools into broader channels for dollar access. It divides the stablecoin ecosystem into four layers to analyze how value is distributed: 1. **Issuance Layer:** Mints stablecoins, holds reserve assets, and captures the spread between reserve yield and user costs (e.g., Tether, Circle). This layer currently earns the largest profit margin. 2. **Infrastructure Layer:** Connects stablecoins to the traditional financial system, handling fiat on/off-ramps, banking integration, compliance (KYC/AML), and asset management (e.g., Bridge, BVNK). This is the "unglamorous" but critical work, building the essential bridges between crypto and real-world finance. 3. **Acquiring/Distribution Layer:** Integrates stablecoins into merchant systems, manages payment flows, and provides enterprise financial software (e.g., Stripe, Coinbase). They act as the access point for businesses. 4. **Application Layer:** The end-users and businesses that ultimately use stablecoins for payments, settlements, or as a store of value. They benefit from convenience but have little pricing power. The core thesis is that while the issuance layer currently dominates profits, the often-overlooked **infrastructure layer holds significant long-term potential**. The real challenge and barrier to mass adoption is not the on-chain transfer of stablecoins (which is simple), but the complex "last mile" integration into existing business workflows, banking systems, and regulatory frameworks across different countries. Companies in this layer are currently in a "land grab" phase, investing heavily to build networks, secure bank partnerships, and establish compliance pathways. While their position is currently pressured by the profitable issuers above and distribution platforms below, the article suggests that if stablecoins become a default financial rail for businesses, the infrastructure providers who have done the hard work of integration will ultimately gain strong pricing power and become entrenched, essential players.

marsbitHá 4h

The Value Distribution of Stablecoins

The Value Distribution of Stablecoins The article argues that stablecoins are evolving from a mere trading tool into a broad "dollar channel." It analyzes the industry's value chain through four layers: 1. **Issuance Layer (e.g., Tether, Circle):** The top layer that mints stablecoins, holds reserve assets, and captures the thickest interest rate spread. 2. **Infrastructure Layer (e.g., Bridge, BVNK):** Connects stablecoins to the traditional financial system, handling critical but complex "dirty work" like fiat on/off-ramps, banking integration, compliance (KYC/AML), and cross-border settlement. 3. **Acquiring/Distribution Layer (e.g., Stripe, Coinbase):** Embeds stablecoins into merchant systems, manages payment flows, and integrates with enterprise software. 4. **Application Layer:** End-users and businesses that ultimately use stablecoins for payments, settlement, or storing value. The author posits that while the issuance layer currently captures the most profit, the most overlooked and potentially critical layer is infrastructure. The core challenge for stablecoin adoption isn't the on-chain transfer (which is simple), but bridging the gap between blockchain and the real-world financial system. This involves solving practical problems for businesses: fiat conversion, reconciliation, tax handling, and user onboarding. Infrastructure companies are currently in a difficult "land-grab" phase—building networks, securing banking relationships, and achieving compliance country-by-country. They face pressure from both the profitable issuance layer above and distribution platforms below. However, the author suggests this layer is building a crucial moat. Once stablecoins become a default business rail, the infrastructure players who have done the hard work of integration may gain significant, durable value and pricing power.

链捕手Há 4h

Why Is Nvidia Borrowing $20 Billion When It's Not Short of Cash?

Nvidia's recent announcement to issue at least $20 billion in senior notes, despite holding a strong cash position with over $48.6 billion in free cash flow last quarter, is not a sign of financial need. Instead, it represents a strategic move to leverage its high credit rating (recently upgraded to AA by S&P) to secure low-cost, long-term debt. This capital will support long-term AI infrastructure investments, data centers, R&D, supply chain prepayments, and strategic investments, while allowing the company to continue aggressive shareholder returns through stock buybacks and dividends. The decision reflects a mature capital management strategy: using debt to finance long-term growth assets is more efficient and less dilutive to shareholders than equity financing. It signals that Nvidia, like other tech giants (Alphabet, Meta, Amazon), is entering a new phase of heavy AI capital expenditure, shifting from a pure growth story to a story about capital allocation, credit strength, and long-term ecosystem positioning. The key question for investors is whether Nvidia can maintain its high cash flow generation and ensure that returns from these AI investments justify the cost of capital over the long term. The bond issuance amplifies its expansion capabilities but also ties its valuation more closely to the broader AI investment cycle's sustainability and profitability.

marsbitHá 4h

Why Is Nvidia Borrowing $20 Billion When It's Not Short of Cash?

marsbitHá 4h

Liberland Fires Tech Secretary After Alleged Blockchain And Website Takeover Attempt

Liberland's congress has voted to remove Technology Secretary Dorian Stern Vukotić, following a resolution accusing him of attempting to hijack the Liberland.org domain, removing administrative multisig protections, blocking the president from voting, and launching unauthorized tokens. The incident serves as a case study in blockchain governance, highlighting risks that go beyond smart contracts to include control over domains, admin keys, and off-chain authority. For the crypto industry, it underscores the need to scrutinize decentralization claims against operational realities, where a small group can still compromise governance. The story reflects a broader market shift where infrastructure security and governance are becoming as critical as price action. Editorial framing should treat the development as a verified information signal about governance risks, avoiding overstatement of Liberland's legal status and leaving room for follow-up evidence.

bitcoinistHá 5h

Liberland Fires Tech Secretary After Alleged Blockchain And Website Takeover Attempt

bitcoinistHá 5h

How to Do Research Well: Deliberately Practice the Real Skills That Matter

No one truly teaches you how to do research. You're often given a desk, a pre-selected problem, and vague instructions to "create something new." Consequently, many people reverse-engineer the job based on visible outputs—papers, posts, announcements—learning only how to *appear* like a researcher rather than how to *become* one. True research capability is built from stacking small, trainable skills, nearly all of which can be developed through deliberate practice. **Pick Your Own Problem:** Most researchers absorb problems from advisors or trends, lacking the underlying reasoning. Choosing a problem you genuinely care about, as John Schulman advises, leads to original work. Develop "taste" like a muscle: predict experiment outcomes, guess paper results from methods, and track which findings remain important over time. **Upgrade Your Inputs:** Relying on shared reading lists (arXiv hot lists, filtered group chats) leads to unoriginal conclusions. Undervalued old literature often holds crucial insights (e.g., MoE, LSTM, backpropagation). Richard Sutton's "The Bitter Lesson" or Claude Shannon's 1952 talk on creative thinking are more predictive than lengthy modern surveys. Breadth matters as much as depth: draw from neuroscience, mechanism design, hardware knowledge, and honest statistics. Read papers directly, especially appendices and limitations sections. **Write Everything Down:** As Paul Graham noted, writing exposes flaws in seemingly mature ideas. Writing is the cheapest defense against self-deception. Following Feynman's principle, Darwin programmatically wrote down facts contradicting his theory to combat memory bias. Maintain a detailed log of hypotheses, setups, predictions, results, and updated understandings. Reviewing past logs fosters essential humility.

marsbitHá 6h

How to Do Research Well: Deliberately Practice the Real Skills That Matter

marsbitHá 6h

Trading

Spot

Futuros