ABL阿布辣2020

Oracle (ORCL)
Facing massive debt stress due to AI infrastructure expansion
This is a hot topic in the market for 2025-2026
Mainly stemming from the hefty partnership with OpenAI

On the books debt: As of around the end of November 2025
Unpaid bonds and other borrowings of about $108 billion
One of the largest debt loads among big tech companies
Long-term debt at the end of FY2025 is about $92.6 billion
Quickly ramping up to over $100 billion
(Some data shows long-term debt hitting $124.7 billion in Q3 FY2026)

Additional commitments: About $248 billion in future data center
Lease obligations, total financial obligations could approach $400 billion

Recent financing: Issued $18 billion in bonds in September 2025
Planning to raise another $38 billion for OpenAI-related data centers
(Projects in Texas and Wisconsin)
Overall plan for 2026 to raise $45-50 billion
(Debt + equity split evenly)

Market reaction and risks ⚠️
Wall Street digesting the pressure:
Banks (like JPMorgan) struggling to share the massive loans
Single counterparty exposure limits are being pushed to the max.
Some debt is structured as project financing
(Not directly on Oracle's balance sheet)
But still impacts credit perception

Litigation and credit concerns:
At the start of 2026, bondholders collectively sued Oracle
Accusing them of concealing subsequent
Massive financing plans during the $18 billion bond issuance, causing bond prices to drop
Credit Default Swap (CDS) costs surged at one point
Some bond spreads nearing junk bond levels

Other challenges: Data center delays, partner pullouts
(Like Blue Owl), power supply constraints,
And whether AI demand can quickly convert into revenue
Are all pain points of concern in the market.
$XAUT #沃什美联储政策前瞻

#dusk $DUSK @Dusk

Dusk: a privacy-and-compliance Layer 1 built for regulated finance
In an era where crypto and traditional finance are gradually converging, the blockchain that institutions can genuinely adopt must meet two major needs at once: “privacy” and “compliance.” Most public chains are either fully transparent—leading to the leakage of sensitive institutional data—or overly anonymous—unable to pass regulatory review. Dusk was created to resolve this core contradiction with a purpose-built Layer 1 blockchain.
Dusk’s design goals are clear: to become the infrastructure for regulated digital assets and financial markets.
It focuses on enabling real-world assets (RWAs) such as stocks, bonds, and funds to be natively issued, traded, and settled on-chain, while meeting regulatory requirements including the EU MiCA, MiFID II, DLT Pilot Regime, and GDPR.

Technically, Dusk uses Zero-Knowledge Proofs as its core. By default, transactions can hide amounts, counterparties, and sensitive details, while still preserving “selective disclosure” capabilities—so that regulatory bodies or authorized parties can conduct audits when needed. This “auditable privacy” design allows institutions to avoid choosing between privacy and compliance.

On the consensus side, Dusk employs the Succinct Attestation-based high-efficiency Proof-of-Stake protocol, emphasizing fast and deterministic finality—critical for financial settlement scenarios. In addition, it supports multiple transaction models and execution environments, including mechanisms tailored to privacy use cases, as well as an EVM-compatible layer, giving developers greater flexibility in building applications.

Unlike many projects that only “tokenize,” Dusk emphasizes native on-chain issuance, reducing intermediaries and settlement latency. Through collaborations with regulated exchanges (such as NPEX) and others, compliance capabilities are directly embedded into the ecosystem. For users, there may be opportunities to hold and trade institutional-grade assets directly in their wallets, while still retaining self-custody rights.

In summary, Dusk is not a general-purpose public chain—it is infrastructure specifically built for “regulated finance on-chain.” By combining privacy, compliance, and institutional-level settlement performance, it offers a viable path for TradFi and blockchain to truly connect. As Europe’s regulatory framework continues to roll out, these privacy- and compliance-focused layers are worth keeping a close eye on.

Strategy Selling Bitcoin Sparks Panic?
CEO Promises: We’ll Buy More This Year,
Striving to Become the Morgan Stanley of the Digital Economy.

Strategy, the publicly listed company (stock ticker: MSTR; formerly MicroStrategy) that holds the largest amount of Bitcoin, is a key barometer for the cryptocurrency market with every move it makes. On August 10 (Taipei time), Strategy CEO Phong Le appeared on Fox Business’s business show “The Claman Countdown,” providing detailed explanations for the company’s recent actions that have broken the myth of “only buying and never selling,” including a rare sell-off of Bitcoin, in an effort to ease market concerns.

Selling Small Amounts Is Only to Hold Cash; Reserves Surge to $4.75 Billion
According to the latest disclosed data, since the beginning of 2026, Strategy has cumulatively sold about 6,948 BTC, raising roughly $433 million. The most recent transaction took place in early August, when 1,690 BTC were sold at an average price of $64,262 per coin. In the interview, Phong Le stated clearly that these sell actions are purely a temporary adjustment to the company’s capital structure.

He noted that over the past few months, the company’s strategic focus has been building a large U.S. dollar cash reserve. The cash position has been increased significantly from about $800 million to $4.75 billion. This funding will mainly be used to strengthen the balance sheet and is sufficient to cover future preferred stock dividends and interest for approximately 2.7 years. Phong Le also admitted that the company learned an important lesson in 2026: “Institutional investors and preferred stock investors do not treat Bitcoin, which has very high liquidity, as directly equivalent to cash.”

Book Loss Exceeds $8.7 Billion, Yet Still Determined to Become a “Morgan Stanley of the Digital Economy”
Although Strategy’s total holdings have now declined to about 840,447 BTC (still representing about 4% of the world’s total Bitcoin supply) and the average cost basis is as high as $75,385, the company is currently facing unrealized losses of roughly $8.7 to $9.5 billion on paper. Even so, management remains confident in its long-term strategy.

$MSTR $BTC #美国7月CPI与PPI数据本周出炉

Questions arise about Buffett’s era! Berkshire Hathaway’s financial report delivers an impressive performance—yet “the big short” investor Michael Burry pours cold water.

After the post-Buffett era, the capital allocation strategy of the U.S. insurance and investment giant
Berkshire Hathaway
is quietly shifting, sparking polarized reactions in the capital markets.

On August 10, according to a report by foreign media outlet CNBC, Berkshire just released
its strong second-quarter earnings—not only did operating profit grow markedly,
it also launched large-scale share buybacks and net share purchases.
However, Michael Burry—the “big short” investor who correctly predicted the 2008 financial crisis—publicly dampened enthusiasm,
saying he no longer looks favorably on the company’s investment value.

Second-quarter performance:
Operating profit: approximately $13 billion, up about 16% year over year.
Net income: approximately $25.67 billion, more than double year over year
(mainly driven by unrealized gains on stock investments).
Revenue: approximately $10.18 billion, up about 10% year over year.
The insurance business (such as GEICO) remained relatively weak, but the manufacturing,
service and retail operations—as well as the performance of the energy segment and the BNSF railroad—were strong.
They complemented each other well, and the stock rose after the earnings were announced.

Major shift in capital allocation (the Abel era):
In the second quarter, Berkshire repurchased about $4.5 billion of its own shares
(far higher than the $235 million in the first quarter). It added more in July,
with over $3.3 billion.
It ended 14 consecutive quarters of net stock sales and turned to net purchases of roughly $19.8–$20.0 billion worth of stock.
Of that, about $10 billion was used to buy Alphabet
(the parent company of Google).
It also acquired homebuilder Taylor Morrison for about $6.8 billion in cash.
Cash and short-term securities fell from historical highs of roughly $38.0–$39.7 billion
at the end of the first quarter to about $36.5 billion
at the end of the second quarter (the first quarterly decline in four years).
The market initially interpreted this as a positive signal, showing management’s confidence in the stock
and effective use of capital.

Michael Burry’s criticism
Burry posted on Substack and X, saying:
His biggest concern is that after Buffett steps down, the successor team is “too old and
ultimately not Buffett,” lacking the patience and discipline to wait for the “juicy balls”
(high-probability, low-risk, high-quality opportunities).
“I now believe this concern has come true. I no longer think
Berkshire is an attractive investment target.”
$GOOG.US

WLFI’s Largest Public Purchase Order of $100 Million
Money Flows Behind Suspected Laundering Investments, Exposed by The New York Times

The New York Times has revealed a stunning market development:
a crypto project closely linked to the family of the sitting U.S. president—
World Liberty Financial (WLFI)
—its largest publicly disclosed governance token buy order
reportedly came from a Chinese businessman
Guo Ren Zhou, who is currently under investigation by the UK for money laundering.
The investment was completed on June 26 via Aqua1
Foundation in the United Arab Emirates,
with up to $75 million flowing to
entities associated with the Trump family and co-founder Zach Witkoff.
Eric Trump reportedly met with Guo in Dubai, and afterward
Guo said the deal was “participating in a crypto project
involving the Trump family.”

Guo’s background is full of warning signs.
He was arrested in the UK in March 2021
on suspicion of money laundering; meanwhile,
Chinese courts also issued him civil judgments totaling
about RMB 19.4 million
for failure to repay loans.

Although UK authorities confirmed that as of late July 2026,
his money-laundering investigation is still ongoing,
he has not yet been formally charged.
For such a “high-risk” individual to easily inject
a massive amount of capital into a crypto project
deeply tied to the U.S. president’s family
is deeply concerning.
The incident once again highlights shortcomings in the
anti-money-laundering (AML)
and “know your customer” (KYC) mechanisms
in the cryptocurrency sector.
When traditional financial institutions face individuals
who are under investigation by foreign law enforcement agencies,
they typically flag them as high-risk immediately and refuse to do business;
however, WLFI’s token sale clearly did not trigger
those kinds of defenses.
When $100 million from a dubious source flows into
a politically sensitive project,
the issue is no longer simply “whether the tokens count as
securities,” but rather “where exactly did this money
come from.”

In fact, compliance concerns surrounding WLFI
have not surfaced for the first time.
Earlier, the project’s partner was reported to have links
to the sanctions list associated with Cambodia’s “Prince Group.”
In addition, a deal on the Abu Dhabi side involving a
$500 million acquisition of 49% equity in the company
also triggered waves of U.S. national security scrutiny.

Taken together, these events have led outsiders to question:
Should a crypto project tightly connected to the family of the sitting president
be subject to stricter regulatory oversight and disclosure requirements?
$WLFI