market

All this smelled like singe to the market.

by

Everything indicates that hostilities have ceasedand with a result that at this point few observers expected: Netflix has given up bidding more for Warner Bros., paving the way for Paramount to take over the media giant for about $111 billion. It is the (foreseen) outcome of a bidding war that started in October 2025 and that now gives a new kick and unexpectedly reorders the panorama of the streaming and global entertainment. The war dates back to 2016. That is, to the purchase of Time Warner by AT&T in October 2016 for $85.4 billion, including debt. The intention was to combine the largest telephone company in the United States with the assets of HBO, CNN, Warner Bros. Pictures and DC Comics to build a technological and entertainment giant. There were problems from the beginning (the merger was delayed almost a year due to legal issues) and it deprived the company of the optimal launch window for HBO Max in a market that was already beginning to become saturated with streaming services. streaming. In 2021 AT&T would give WarnerMedia to Discovery. Expenses and more expenses. The new Warner Bros. Discovery had ambition. Its CEO David Zaslav presented a project of 20 billion annual expenses to reach 400 million global subscribers, but none of that was fulfilled: the shares have fallen 60% since 2022, with losses of 35 billion dollars in market capitalization. In June 2025, Warner advertisement which was separated into two companies: one for studios and streaming and another for linear networks (with CNN, TNT Sports, Discovery and Bleacher Report). The aim was to release the burden of the cable channels, which were mainly responsible for a debt of 37,000 million. Back to the ring. This split once again makes Warner Bros. a more attractive target than a conglomerate with dozens of cable television channels and millions in debt. In October, it formally opened a sales process, which boosted its price by more than 10%. Three names stood out from the rest: Netflix, NBCUniversal and Paramount Skydance. The first two only wanted studies and streamingthe third was willing to buy the entire company. According to some analyststhis made the operation very risky for Paramount, but very interesting for Warner. David Ellison, CEO of Paramount, had even made three informal offers before October, which had been rejected. Bidding war. In November the three candidates presented their proposals non-binding: Paramount at $25.50 per share (the first of all, a month earlier, had been $19), Netflix and Universal with non-public offers. In December there was a second round, and Paramount rose to $26.50 per share. Universal pulled out. On December 5, Netflix was considered a winner from the auction with $27.75 per share and without counting the channels. Paramount’s tantrum. Three days later, David Ellison launched a hostile offer directly to WBD shareholders: $30 per share in cash for the entire company. The offer was supported by the Ellison family, the private equity fund RedBird Capital, the sovereign wealth funds of Saudi Arabia, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates. From there, offers followed. backed by the CEO’s fatherLarry Ellison. He continued to raise the price and continued to address shareholders directly, without success. Paramount’s triumph. In February, Netflix granted Warner a seven-day waiver to resume talks with Paramount: after what Sarandos described as “flooding the area with confusion,” Paramount was forced to come up with its best proposal or be ruled out. On February 24, put on the table $31 per share in cash, plus the assumption of debt and several extras: a regulatory penalty fee of $7 billion if regulators blocked the closure, the assumption of payment of the $2.8 billion that WBD would owe to Netflix if it broke its current agreement, and a holding fee for shareholders if regulatory approval was extended beyond fall 2026. The shareholders waited for a counteroffer from Netflix, but it did not arrive: the profitability projections Above $30 per share were very complicated: the share price had grown 63% compared to Paramount’s first offer. Ted Sarandos, co-CEO of Netflix, had traveled to Washington that same day to meet with Trump administration officials, is spoken that looking for more data on the regulatory environment. Before the end of the meeting, Netflix had already spoken: it was not going to raise its offer for purely financial reasons, which made Paramount’s option more than possible a winner, in the absence of formal confirmation from shareholders. And now what? Well, immediate effect: Netflix shares rose about 13%, Paramount gained 5%, Warner fell 2%. That is to say, the market celebrates Netflix’s retreat. On the table, a few issues to resolve: the formal board vote and the regulatory approval phase (which, in the best scenario projected by Paramount, will not conclude before September 30, 2026) that can explode in countless areasalthough the climate is favorable given the political situation (the relationship between Larry Ellison and Trump – one financed the other’s campaign – is more than public). Where are we now. Netflix has many other tentacles to grow with. For example, it has just reached an agreement with Sony whereby the company’s releases (the Spiderverse films, yes, but also the next ‘Zelda’ or the Beatles films by Sam Mendes) will have an exclusive world premiere with the platform. Something similar happens with Universal: Netflix is ​​the streaming premiere platform for franchises like ‘Jurassic World’. Netflix ended 2025 with more than 325 million paying subscribers and projects revenues of between $50.7 billion and $51.7 billion by 2026. It is not doing badly, and will increase its investment in content to approximately $20 billion annually, according to its quarterly letter to shareholders. On the other hand, we will have an entity that combines two of the five active traditional Hollywood studios with a multitude of linear channels and two streaming services. streaming. Of course, it is still early to talk about mergers between HBO Max and Paramount+, sales of Warner’s historical archive to alleviate debts or conflicts between CNN and CBS … Read more

An economic science fiction text has sunk Visa and Mastercard in the stock market. The reason is more disturbing than the story itself

by

Citrini Research, a hedge fund American published this week a text written as if it were a macroeconomic memorandum from June 2028. It is not a prediction, its authors warn. It is a speculative exercise. A feasible scenario. It has achieved 24 million impressions, and counting. It is not an anecdotal tweet. The markets they have responded by sinking. Visa has fallen 4.4%. Mastercard, 6.3%. American Express, almost 8%. And Capital One, 8%. This deserves an explanation. And it’s not what it seems. Between the lines. The market reaction is not explained by the specific content of the Citrini Research report, which includes arguments as debatable as that AI agents will abandon cards to pay with stablecoins in Solana. Antonio Ortiz, technology analysts, has pointed it out precisely: part of the argument “it is from the first of Twitter AI-hype“. The idea that an agent will compare twenty food delivery apps vibecodeadas to find the cheapest one smells like a caricature of the future. But the panic is not irrational. It is precisely the panic of not knowing where the limit is. Why is it importantand. What has moved the market has not been so much the thesis about payments but the thesis about the destruction of value. And that is solid: many billions of dollars of market capitalization have been built on a single foundation: that humans are slow, impatient, forgetful and loyal out of inertia. That we do not compare prices. That we renew subscriptions that we do not use. And that we pay commissions that we do not negotiate. An AI agent has none of those weaknesses. And that changes everything. The backdrop. Citrini’s report comes at a time when the so-called “saaspocalypse“is no longer a metaphor. WSJ states that investors are terrified by the possibility that AI ends up doing the work that large software companies bill for today. ServiceNow, Salesforce, business management platforms… all built on the premise that companies need software for their employees to do their jobs. But… what happens when employees disappear? What if the software itself can be replicated in weeks with agentic coding tools? Citrini’s fiction begins exactly there, in early 2026, when a competent developer can reproduce the core functionality of a mid-market SaaS in a few weeks, and constructs a scenario of systemic collapse. The big question. The report’s most disturbing argument is that in every previous technological cycle, job destruction created new jobs that only humans could do. This time, AI is already occupying those new positions as well. If that’s true—if AI improves faster than workers can reorient themselves—the self-correcting mechanism that has always kept creative destruction from turning into outright destruction wouldn’t work. That is the scenario that the markets have discounted this week, even if only partially and speculatively thanks to a creepypasta financial. Yes, but. The scenario requires assuming a speed of adoption that is not guaranteed, a completely absent political response and a total absence of new economic sectors. None of the three conditions are set in stone. Furthermore, as Antonio points out, there is some collective hysteria in the reaction: each announcement or “scary story catches attention and moves investors.” Markets are trading in panic over the unknown. But there’s an important difference between saying “this scenario won’t happen” and saying “this scenario is impossible.” And that difference is exactly what has the market nervous. The alarm signal. The most striking thing this week is that a speculative text, written in economic science fiction format, has been enough to move billions in market capitalization. That says a lot about the state of certainty in the markets regarding AI: it is practically non-existent. Nobody really knows how much a company whose moat It is human friction in a world where that friction is disappearing. The canary is still alive. But investors have stopped trusting the canary. In Xataka | AI promised to revolutionize all sectors. It has only revolutionized programming while the rest is still waiting Featured image | Avery Evans

Kia needed an electric Sportage on the market. The Kia EV5 is an (almost) perfect bet for the European family

by

Kia has been building one of the most interesting ranges of electric cars on the market for years. The EV family has managed to establish itself as one of the most attractive and risky options. From the Kia EV6 and its particular design to the most rational EV3 and the monstrous EV9. Now, the company has placed the EV5 on the market, one of the most rational proposals and necessary for your current offer. South Koreans needed a car that would perform the functions of the Kia Sportage, one of their best-selling models, with completely electric technology. And his proposal is as solvent as it is rational and attractive. Kia EV5 technical sheet New Kia EV5 Body type five-seater SUV Measurements and weight 4,610 meters long, 1,875 meters wide and 1,680 meters high. Wheelbase of 2,750 meters. 1800 kg weight. Trunk 566 liters with the sum of the front and rear trunk. Maximum power 160 kW (217 HP) and 295 Nm. WLTP consumption 16.9 kWh/100 km DGT environmental distinctive Zero emissions. Driving aids (ADAS) Mandatory by the European Union. Others Triple screen: 12.3-inch instrument panel 12.3-inch central screen 5-inch climate control screen Android Auto and Apple Car Play compatibility. Wireless mobile phone charging. Harman Kardon sound system as option. Electric hybrid. No. Plug-in hybrid. No. Electric Yeah. 81.4 kWh battery with 530 km of WLTP autonomy Versions with double motor (all-wheel drive) and a more powerful GT option will arrive. Price and release Now available With 81.4 kWh battery from 46,070 euros before aid (from 39,490 euros with discounts and aid) Why does an electric car have less autonomy than advertised? Balance is the word We could say explain the Kia EV5 with a football simile. The Kia EV5 is like a sober doorman. If you don’t like football, a goalkeeper sober He is the one who flees from eccentricities, the one who turns spectacular saves into simple saves. And a stop is just the final result of a very in-depth previous exercise, of strenuous training to be strong in the legs and extensive knowledge to position oneself in the right place at the right time. Whether the stop is complicated because it is attached to the lower corner of one of the posts or to give security to the team by taking the ball in a lateral center. Can an eccentric goalkeeper be good? Yes. And very good indeed. There are goalkeepers who earn their fame for stops that seem impossible, for having reflexes typical of the animal world. But it is no less true that many of these saves are only the result of having made a bad previous decision, of reaching the ball in a hurry for the simple fact of being worse positioned under the goal. Something like this happens with the Kia EV5. It is not a spectacular car in any sense. But almost everything is done grating at a very high level. It’s not eccentric, it’s not surprising. But it is a good electric car. A very interesting option if you are looking for a good family car as the only vehicle at home. And the Kia EV5 does not have the imprint and footprint of the EV9. Nor is it committed to that monolithic aspect of the EV3 that makes it so particular and that polarizes opinions about its design so much. This intermediate option seems like a kind of softened version of both cars without losing that muscular appearance, playing with straight and very pronounced edges. Its appearance, in fact, makes it appear larger. Its 4.61 meters seem to be more when you have it in front of you for the first time. We are, however, at figures very much to the taste of the European customer, who in this type of car largely opts for vehicles slightly larger than four and a half meters. With a wheelbase of 2.75 meters, the space for the rear seats is very good and maintains a trunk that, adding a front space in which little more than the charging cables can fit, reaches 566 liters. In the front area, it maintains the aesthetics and layout that has been accompanying the brand’s latest launches. The instrument panel and the central screen are embraced by the same frame, with a third digital space that unites both surfaces. All of this is supported on a kind of very clean horizontal desktop with touch buttons on the surface. On the steering wheel and the central area we have a multitude of physical buttons with some details that we liked. The instrument panel is displayed on a widely configurable 12.3-inch screen in its central area. In it we can find graphics of all kinds, from consumption to navigation or what the infotainment system is playing. Above the view we have a clear Head-Up Display with precise information for driving. The central screen, compatible with Android Auto and Apple CarPlayit is also 12.3 inches. Here, the possibilities are very wide and it has interesting solutions, such as a vertically sliding widget that supports the information displayed by the browser. However, I have two problems. The first is that it has so many shortcuts and so many functions to customize that it forces you to overcome a certain learning curve to be clear where each function is. I, who hadn’t gotten into a Kia for a while, had to spend some time finding, for example, the consumption data. My second problem is in the representation of the icons and shortcuts. The black background is useful to avoid confusing the driver but I think there is a lack of contrast in the icons. I, at least, have had some difficulty reading them clearly. I would have to test the car further to see if this can be fixed by, for example, increasing the screen brightness. Between both screens there is a third space in which the air conditioning is controlled. It seems like a good one to me. We have the basic … Read more

lose the market that matters

by

Anthropic has closed a financing round of 30,000 million dollars that doubles its valuation to 380,000 millionjust four months after being valued at 183,000 million. The operation is led by the Singapore sovereign fund GIC and Coatue, with participation from NVIDIA and Microsoft. Bang. The company has already raised more than $57 billion since its founding in 2021. OpenAI continues to have the leadership in valuation with half a billion after its last round of 40 billion at the end of last year, but now it faces a threat that is growing faster than expected. Between the lines. The numbers explain an uncomfortable paradox for OpenAI: ChatGPT processes 2.5 billion queries daily and takes the consumer market by storm… …but Anthropic controls 32% of the LLM business market according to Menlo Ventures, compared to 25% for OpenAI. And in programming, the distance is even greater: 42% versus 21%. OpenAI has seen its enterprise share fall from 50% in 2023 to 25% todayjust when this segment is emerging as the most profitable and predictable. If the consumer chatbot doesn’t turn out to be the winning horse in this race, Sam Altman has a big problem. The contrast. Sarah Friar, chief financial officer of OpenAI, acknowledged in Davos that they have gone from 70/30 consumer-business to 60/40, with the expectation of reaching 50/50 this year. The transcript of the interview CNBC Bring all the details. Dario Amodei, CEO of Anthropic, boasts of maintaining an 80/20 business-consumer ratio from the beginning. Anthropic reports recurring revenues of more than 14 billion, with growth multiplying tenfold annually for three years. And customers spending more than $100,000 annually have increased sevenfold in 12 months. Yes, but. Neither of them is profitable yet: Anthropic projected gross margins of 40% by 2025, but lowered his expectations by 10 points due to inference costs 23% higher than expected. The servers rented from Google and Amazon weigh more than calculated. OpenAI faces the same problem as both turn to the market every few months to fund the next phase. That is why both are considering IPOs between this year and next. Unexpected twist. The launch of Claude Code in December has accelerated enterprise adoption in a way that perhaps no one anticipated. The tool has not only doubled users in a month, but has consolidated the perception of Claude as “the serious option” for companies compared to ChatGPT. If companies value something, even more than the end consumer, it is stability and predictability. And Anthropic has been able to capitalize on that demand. Missing? Temporal context: By the time Apple reached a valuation of 380 billion, it had already been in existence for almost four decades. He sold Macs, he sold iPods, he sold iPads. It was already going for the iPhone 5s and its annual profit was 50 billion dollars. Anthropic reaches the same figure without being profitable, compressing decades of value creation into just a few quarters. It is not necessarily wrong, especially with the recent good dynamics of Claude’s company, but it remains to be seen if these models can sustain those explosive revenues and convert them into profits before the market loses patience. In Xataka | Featured image | OpenAI, Anthropic

Argentina has achieved something unprecedented since 1974: reforming its labor market

by

After a session of more than 13 hours, the senators of Argentina they have given the go-ahead to the processing of the labor reform proposed by the government of Javier Milei. The call Labor Modernization Law It is Milei’s first major legislative victory in 2026 and rewrites pillars of the current labor system in force since the 1970s. In parallel, the union centers prepare new strikes and judicial actions to try to stop a rule that, in their opinion, makes dismissal cheaper, lengthens the working day and empties the right to strike of any content, while the Executive insists that without this type of reforms Argentina will remain trapped in a rigid labor marketwith a lot of underground economy and little investment. The Senate approves it, the street does not. The project of labor reform in Argentina has overcome its main obstacle by obtaining the necessary majority in the Senate, after more than 13 hours of session that ended with 42 votes in favor and 30 against, with no abstentions. The measure was approved while on the street Tear gas and police charges quelled the discontent of workers and union organizations. The balance of these protests is at least 15 injured and several dozen protesters detained. With the approval of the Senate, the Government is already maneuvering so that the labor regulations pass without major changes their approval by the Deputies, which is considered a mere procedure with supports already closed. Cheaper layoffs. The economic heart of the reform is in the calculation of severance pay. The law modifies what parameters are taken into account to calculate the settlement after dismissal. The bonus is left out of the compensation calculation (Supplementary Annual Salary), vacations and non-monthly bonuses, concepts that today many judges do take into account when calculating compensation. The practical result is that, in the event of an unfair dismissal, the worker will receive compensation lower than with the current scheme, although the norm incorporates a minimum limit of 67% of the usual salary. In addition, large companies can divide the payment of compensation to dismissed employees into up to six monthly installments, and up to 12 installments for SMEs. A common fund for compensation. To cushion the impact of compensation on companies, the new regulations contemplate the creation of the Labor Assistance Fund (FAL), a kind of common “piggy bank” for companies that is filled with mandatory monthly contributions. Large companies will contribute 1% monthly and SMEs 2.5% on the same basis that is used today for Social Security contributions. Therefore, Social Security will no longer have these resources and they will be administered under state supervision. When a worker is fired, a good part of the compensation that corresponds It will not be assumed by the company, but will come largely from that fund. Day up to 12 hours and bank of hours. The reform does not increase the working hours, which continue to be a maximum of 48 hours per week, but it does change how they are distributed. The key is in the “hour bank”. Company and worker may agree that, instead of paying for all hours worked beyond the eight hours per day established by law, they are counted as overtime hours and are later compensated with days off or reductions in working hours. This measure opens the door to some days that the day can be extended up to 12 hours, as long as it is then balanced within the agreed period. For the Executive, this new model gives flexibility to sectors with peaks of activity. For the unions, it gives rise to the continuation of the days without the economic bonus that today protects the worker. Unregulated overtime. Another of the changes approved in the new Argentine labor regulations is that compensation for overtime is no longer regulated almost exclusively by collective agreements, and is now negotiated individually between the employee and the company. Added to this is another relevant novelty in terms of salaries: the salary can be paid both in pesos and in foreign currency, or even in kind, food or accommodation. Salary payment must be made through a bank transaction, thus reducing the underground economy that encourages cash payments, and increasing fiscal control. Medical leave and vacations. Medical leaves due to illness or accidents other than work are limited in some cases. If the cause of the decline is considered a voluntary act or a health risk behavior, the employee will receive 50% of the basic salary for three months, as long as he or she does not have dependents, or six months if he or she does. In other cases, the percentage may reach up to 75% of the salary. The company also gains weight in the medical and control boards, which the unions interpret as a lack of protection for sick workers. Vacations also change logic. The new law allows vacation days to be divided into blocks of no less than seven consecutive days, which may be rotated throughout the year. In this way, it is no longer guaranteed to have all the summer vacationand it is only ensured that the worker will have at least a few days of vacation in the summer coinciding with school vacations once every three years. In practice, companies gain margin to organize the vacation calendar according to productive needs and distribute staff in different batches during the year without the employee having the power to decide on it. Limits on the right to strike. One of the most sensitive points for the labor movement are the restrictions on the right to strike and union organization. The reform significantly expands the list of “essential services“in which, even during a legal strike, at least 75% of the activity must be maintained. For the worker, this means that many stoppages will result in almost normal services and that the pressure capacity of the strikes is significantly reduced. Union meetings during working hours will require prior authorization from the companies and will not … Read more

There is only one market in China where European brands dominate. Exactly, the one that no one cares about

by

Much has been written about the decline in sales of European and traditional manufacturers in China. Volkswagens, Porsches and Mercedes have collapsed in a market that, until very recently, was key when it came to presenting results year after year. Have they collapsed? Not in all markets. In one they are still leaders. Exactly, the one that no one cares about. Leaders. A ranking where 18 of the 20 best-selling cars in China are not Chinese? Yes. It is the extra-luxury market, the one where cars that cost more than a million Chinese yuan are collected, almost 122,000 euros in direct exchange. They collect in CarNewsChina that in this list only BYD has made it among the best sellers. The rest, 90% of the list, is made up of the so-called traditional brands. If we remove Lexus, which is Asian and enters with its Lexus LM (a minivan with a screen that crosses the entire width of the car) and its Lexus LS, the rest are European brands. Yes, Europe also rules in China but it does so in a market of ridiculous volume. Porsche dominates here. The best-selling car over one million yuan is the Porsche Cayenne. Before its renewal that will offer an electric version, the Porsche SUV leads this table with 17,194 units sold in 2025. Land Rover closes the podium, which has placed the Range Rover and the Defender as the second and third best-selling car in this group. Below, Porsche repeats again with the Panamera (fourth classified) and will appear again with the Taycan. But the brand that is most repeated is Mercedes. Cars signed by the brand appear up to seven times, although, yes, it accumulates the sales of the AMG and Maybach divisions separately. Their S Class (fifth, signed by Maybach, and sixth classified) are the best sellers. It also appears with the G-Class and the GLS. The exception. From the Chinese market, only BYD penetrates this hyper-luxury market. It does so with the YangWang U8 and its even longer version, the U8L. This car, both versions of which have exceeded a thousand units, is a gigantic SUV with extended range options (plug-in hybrids with very wide electric range) that has become famous because it is capable of floating on rivers thanks to the enormous power of its wheels. A drop in the ocean (1). There are two problems for European manufacturers. The first is more than evident: its sales are very low. Porsche, which in 2020 shipped almost 89,000 units in China has closed 2025 selling less than half (it has fallen short of 42,000 units). The drop compared to 2024 is 26%. Mercedes boasted when it comes to presenting results of continuing to lead the extra-luxury market in the Asian country. The accumulated sales in this list exceed 38,000 units but the fact that the twentieth place is the Mercedes-AMG GLS with 83 units sold throughout the year gives an idea of ​​its size and its competition. Yeah, Mercedes sold almost 460,000 units in China last year but it is 12% less than the previous year and is very far from the almost 775,000 units placed in 2020. A drop in the ocean (2). This market, if we analyze its best classifieds, almost entirely lacks electric cars. The closest thing is the plug-in hybrid versions, like those offered by BYD. They are automobiles, pure gasoline ones, that are clearly declining in China. Where in 2020 17.8 million gasoline cars were sold Today 10.85 million cars of this type are sold. New energy cars (plug-in hybrids and electric) already account for 60% of sales in the Asian country. In Autohomeexplain that this situation has weakened brands that have collaborations with European automotive companies. They give as an example the case of Maiteng, a company associated with Volkswagen that was a symbol of status and recognition and that has had to lower its prices to continue selling. Right now, the market where European manufacturers succeed is the niche of the niche. They don’t even consider it. But there is also another reason why Europeans succeed in this market. The Chinese don’t even consider entering it. With the market clearly betting on its local manufacturers, they are offering their most advanced cars at “affordable” prices compared to foreign manufacturers. Already in his presentation, the Xiaomi SU7 Ultra highlighted its price difference with the Tesla Model S (DEP) and Porsche Taycan Turbo. While the first one came on the market with a price of 814,900 yuan (it would not be included in the previous list), the German one cost almost two million Chinese yuan. The price war in China has pressured all companies to reduce their prices drastically. This has left out traditional companies that have found an evident loss of competitiveness in all types of markets, from general to luxury, where Chinese manufacturers are offering features and equipment typical of hyper-luxury segments in cars that, due to price, do not fall into that category. Photo | Hong Wei Fan and Arthur Wang In Xataka | We tested the Ojo de Dios with which BYD wants to break the market: autonomous driving for a 9,000 euro car

attack the trident that dominates the market

by

One more day, new bad news related to the RAM memory crisis. If you were expecting a Steam Machinenow you can expect it to be more expensive. The rise of AI is causing a component crisis that has no clear end. The SSDs have gone up in price a lot and have 32 GB of RAM on your PC It is the new “I have land.” All Big Tech needs more and, in the absence of it, Intel has chosen to get into it like an elephant in a china shop. Hand in hand with SoftBank to create its own memory chips for data centers and, in the process, take a bite out of the South Korean industry that controls the scene. No end in sight. Intel has been covered several times in recent days. Like a phoenix, it seems that the crisis is behind us and, after years of promises, realities begin. They are ready to start producing its new generation of processors, but also its CEO, Lip-Bu Tan, has commented that They will start producing GPUs for data centers. With that they want to take a bite of the cake that NVIDIA is eating almost alone, but also, the executive let a more bitter pill: “there is no relief in sight for the end of the AMR crisis.” So it points out that does not see a horizon for this price escalation before 2028, and it makes sense if we take into account recent forecasts or possible ‘strange’ movements by some companies. Intel 🤝 SoftBank. Market estimates such as those of TrendForce They point to a memory price increase of between 90 and 95% quarter-on-quarter in this first quarter of the year, but it is not the only thing: SSDs will also rise between 55 and 60% due to one of their components, NAND memory. It is a bad time to build a PC, although companies are moving to open RAM factories, but not for you: for the AI. And here Intel, as we already saidhe doesn’t want to be left behind. A few months ago, Intel partnered with Japan’s SoftBank to find a replacement for HBM memory for data centers. Fix a problem. HBM memory (high bandwidth memory) is ideal for data centers. They allow a large amount of data to be temporarily stored, and they do so at high speed. The problem is that they get very hot and are complex to manufacture. It is one of the key components of GPUs and requires both large amounts of power and optimal heat dissipation. What Intel and SoftBank are looking for is to create an alternative based on stacked DRAM chips. They are not that optimal, but the idea is to find a way to wire them as efficiently as possible so that they are a threat to the HBM memory monopoly. “Monopoly“The idea is to have a prototype in the short term with the aim of starting to market it by 2030. We will see if AI fever lasts so long. But anyway, if the experiment goes well, it could be a significant blow to the South Korean companies Samsung and SK Hynix, as well as the American company. Micron. They are the three companies that they practically control the market for both RAM like HBM chips. And something as important as it is symbolic: it will be the first time that Japan aspires to return to the throne of memory chip manufacturers that it ruled in the 80s and that it lost to South Korea. Although be careful: Samsung is also investigating these stacked DRAM memories. NVIDIA and its demands. In the end, they are all moving. The big producers have already detailed its roadmap for the development of RAM for the next five years. And the whales that are taking over the product -NVIDIA-, are ‘encouraging’ the production companies let’s get the batteries. Without going any further, a few days ago Jensen Huang, boss of NVIDIA, met with representatives of the Taiwanese industry (TSMC, Asus or Foxconn) and told them that this year he needed a lot of memory and a lot of wafers. Also I know it has told Samsung. As we said in the first lines, if you were hoping for a quick solution to the crisis or wanted to build a PC, the news is not good. And all the movements that we are seeing in the industry to expand production and find solutions point to the same direction: continue powering data centers. Images | Intel In Xataka | TSMC’s only problem was that it was in Taiwan. So the United States has decided to get her out of there

The panic of technology companies about running out of chips has broken the RAM market. Manufacturers have said enough

by

The RAM market is completely broken. In November of last year we talked about a 300% increasewas the result of the perfect storm caused by AI and data centers. Faced with brutal shortages, large companies are trying to get hold of as much memory as possible, which further destabilizes the market. Now manufacturers are taking matters into their own hands. No hoarders, thank you. In an extensive report published by Nikkei Asiatalk about the big three DRAM manufacturers (Samsung, Micron and SK Hynix) implementing stricter rules for their customers in order to prevent them from hoarding memory. The measures are aimed at ensuring that demand is real, that is, that the chips are not going to end up collecting dust in a warehouse “just in case.” Manufacturers are asking for details about who the chips are for, the quantities and what they will be used for. OpenAI’s dirty deal. We go back to October 1, 2025. OpenAI signed an agreement with Samsung and SK Hynix to a potential demand for 900,000 DRAM wafers per month. The figure is equivalent to 40% of all world production, absurd, but what is striking is the “potential.” As they point out multiple users on Xare securing a critical product for data centers that have not yet been built, with money they do not have. Some analysts called this agreement “The dirty DRAM deal”whose hidden objective seemed to point to a rather dirty move: to create a moat by preventing its competitors from accessing critical technology. Open orders. The AI ​​race is not going to stop because chips rise in price and big technology companies have done what they had to do: everything possible to get chips. At the end of last year, Reuters He said that some companies such as Google, Amazon, Microsoft and Meta had even approached Micron with open orders, that is, they were willing to accept all the memory they could supply, without a price cap. A full-fledged preventive hoarding. Compulsive shopping. AI companies are not the only ones that have tried to secure their chips, PC manufacturers such as Asus, MSI, Dell or HP also began to buy RAM compulsively at the end of 2025 for accumulate inventory before what was coming. Manufacturers are aware of overorders and that is why they are now demanding data on the end customer. The winners. While everyone is fighting to get their chips, Samsung is getting rich. It is not only that has tripled its profitsFurthermore, it is the technological more has appreciated in 2025ahead of Alphabet and TSMC. For its part, SK Hynix has doubled its profitsmainly due to the boom in demand for high-bandwidth memory (HBM), of which it is a key supplier. In Xataka | There is a lack of RAM memories and Micron is going to spend 1.8 billion dollars to produce more. but not for you Image | Unsplashedited

This is South Korea’s bet to enter the Western market

by

There are military contracts that are won based on specifications. And there are others that play in the field of story. South Korea is betting on the latter in its offensive to place attack submarines in Canada: it not only talks about platforms, capabilities or industry, but about how to live within them. In the center of the speech appears a phrase that seeks to stay in the head of the reader and, above all, of the political decision-maker: building submarines as “five-star hotels.” Kang Hoon-sik, chief of staff of South Korean President Lee Jae Myung, said this: in a message posted on Facebookintroducing Seoul’s diplomatic and industrial campaign. Industrial size offer. The proposal that South Korea is moving in Canada points to a program of around 12 diesel attack submarines whose investment is estimated at 10 billion euros. It is not only a military issue, it is also a candidacy with a strong industrial component, with a front that brings together the Government and large private actors. Names such as Hanwha, HD Hyundai and Hyundai Motor Group appear in that package, which are vying for a contract and, at the same time, a letter of introduction to Western buyers. Strategic agreement. South Korea’s interest in this contract is not explained only by the size of the project. In The Korea PostKang frames the objective as a big entry into the Western market and as a step to move towards the NATO environment, always in its formulation. That same ambition is presented as an attempt to consolidate defense partnerships with Western countries. It should be noted that South Korean and Canadian companies have already signed six cooperation agreements ranging from steel to artificial intelligence, rare earths, satellites and sensors. The recipient of that speech is not coincidental.. Canada has been suffering the wear and tear of an aging submarine fleet for years, and its replacement program is based on a specific fact: replacing some vessels that, as IE points out, were acquired in the 1990s. Therefore, what is at stake is not a simple replacement of material, but a decision that will condition the Royal Canadian Navy for decades, with enormous industrial, operational and budgetary implications. In this context, any candidate who wants to compete cannot limit himself to offering a platform, he also has to present a framework of reliability and long-term continuity. Germany also wants that contract. South Korea does not compete alone. In the race for the Canadian program the German Thyssenkrupp Marine Systems (TKMS) appearswhich is one of the world’s leading providers of integrated solutions in maritime defense technology. The bidding, therefore, is not reduced to choosing a submarine model, but to deciding which industrial partner best fits a long-term program. In this context, each candidate tries to gain ground not only with benefits, but also with the type of relationship it promises to build with the purchasing country and the ecosystem it trails behind. The battle for the Canadian program leaves a clear idea. The Western defense market is in full competition, and South Korea wants to play on the front line. Your proposal has been presented as more than just a product. On the other side appears a European rival with experience and a name of its own. For now, the only certainty is that there is an intense political and industrial effort to position itself. What is missing, precisely, is what decides these processes: the fine print, the guarantees and Ottawa’s final decision. Images | Royal Canadian Navy | Kang Hoon-sik In Xataka | Germany was a sleeping military giant: now it has been awakened and it is already surpassing the US in bullets produced per year

and the stock market gets restless

by

SpaceX is exploring two merger scenarios: joining with Tesla or xAI, as reported Bloomberg and Reuters citing sources familiar with the matter. This above all is a warning for those who currently have investments in one of Elon Musk’s companies, although it is also a situation that can generate a business earthquake. Perhaps the biggest stock market movement in history. We are going in parts to explain everything we know so far. Two paths on the table. According to Bloomberg, SpaceX has internally discussed the viability of a merger with Tesla, pushed by some investors in the aerospace company. For its part, Reuters point that a combination with xAI is also being evaluated, which could materialize before the IPO scheduled for this year. Of course, it should be noted that none of the companies involved have publicly confirmed these conversations, and sources warn that no final decisions have been made. Movements. Last year, SpaceX agreed invest $2 billion in xAI, according to The Wall Street Journal, and this week Tesla also revealed that it had allocated the same amount to the AI ​​startup, according to account the middle. On the other hand, it is worth mentioning that xAI acquired X (formerly Twitter) in 2024, in an operation that valued xAI at $80 billion and the social network at $33 billion, as Musk himself mentioned. Here we once again witness a circular economy movement among its companies, with consequences that remain to be seen. The logic. There are several legs here. On the one hand, it is worth mentioning that Musk has a thorn in his side build data centers in space to feed AI, something he has expressed on several occasions. In this way, a merger with xAI would allow SpaceX to accelerate this project, taking advantage of xAI’s computing capacity for its in-orbit facilities. In the case of a merger with Tesla, the move could serve well to leverage its ability to manufacture energy storage systems, something that could help SpaceX expedite the development of systems that use solar energy in space to power these data centers. Musk has also talked about using Starship rockets to transport optimus robots from Tesla to the Moon and Mars. The interest of investors. Regardless of the path chosen, any deal could attract considerable interest from many investors, especially infrastructure funds or Middle Eastern sovereign investors, according to they count from Bloomberg. The outlet also relies on public documents in Nevada that show that on January 21, two legal entities were formed with the expression “merger sub” in their names. The name of Bret Johnsen, SpaceX’s chief financial officer, appears in these documents. Between the lines. The operation raises some questions. If SpaceX acquires xAI, SpaceX shareholders could see their stake diluted. If Tesla buys xAI, its shareholders would effectively be financing a bailout of Musk’s other businesses. In any case, it is clear that the possible merger would raise several blisters. The numbers at stake. SpaceX reached a valuation of approximately $800 billion by the end of 2025, according to counted TechCrunch, becoming the most valuable private company in the United States. Tesla has a market capitalization of around $1.56 trillion. According to BloombergSpaceX is contemplating an IPO that could value the company at around $1.5 trillion, possibly in June, close to Musk’s birthday and with a fundraising of up to $50 billion, which would make it the largest IPO in history. Initial reaction. Tesla shares rose as much as 4.5% in after-hours trading after news the news from Bloomberg. Johnsen told employees in December that a possible IPO would help drive “a huge rate of flight” for the Starship rocket and a possible base on the Moon. Meanwhile, the media also says that Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, Morgan Stanley and Robinhood Markets are already positioning themselves to host the operation. Cover image | Flickr (Ministry of Communications) and SpaceX In Xataka | There is a perfect time of year to ask for a raise: January to March

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.