CEO really mean customer service and chasing people down
Everybody got a manifesto now and somehow I still wanna read it 😂
for my @NewYorker column return, I reviewed Hamish McKenzie's memoir / manifesto about founding Substack and saving (?) the media, as well as Sarah Brouilette's new book on how digital platforms inevitably deform the labor of writing newyorker.com/culture/infini…
Mikal retweeted
ALL ULTIMATE TEAM BUG FIXES IN TOMORROW UPDATE
Latest News
Ultimate Team
Made the following changes:
Streamlined SBCs filters will save previously applied filters when completing multiple Streamlined SBCs in the same session.
Reduced the duration of the pack opening sequence.
Addressed the following issues:
SBC Storage Player Items that were submitted into Simplified SBCs could still temporarily appear for when completing other SBCs.
In certain cases when previewing Pathway Evolutions, the incorrect stats could appear highlighted in green.
National flags could appear incorrectly for Holographic Player Items while in gameplay.
The FUT Badge icon could be displayed incorrectly on the scoreboard.
The Time of Day setting would not save properly when changed from the Ultimate Team Menu.
Opponent’s Player Items could appear incorrectly during the match intro when using certain formations.
Goal net colours could not be previewed.
Equipped goal net colours were not appearing in gameplay.
Under specific circumstances, when completing an SBC players could receive an error when accessing the Club tab from the Squad Screen.
When converting a Loan Player into a Concept Player, a freeze could have occurred in certain situations.
The Gallery UI could be shown as having S rank sets complete when no S ranks have yet been completed.
In some cases, players may have seen their opponent's equipped ball, net color, and pitch line color during Ultimate Team matches instead of their own selected items.
The Rank 1-200 Icon and Description could show incorrectly in the Squad Battles Preview screen.
The tradeable UI indicator was missing from the display of packs within the Premium Season Pass.
[PC Only] In some areas of Ultimate Team, mouse click would not work on certain menu options.
Notifications for unclaimed objective rewards from The Grounds were showing in Ultimate Team.
When earning multiple tokens, the notification pop-up could show an incorrect value.
This was a visual only issue.
When viewing a locked objective group, the counter would show as 0/0 instead of displaying the amount of objectives in that group.
Regrading a set multiple times in The Gallery could cause the grading animation to overlap.
In certain situations when claiming Gallery rewards, if a notification for a new set is pressed while on the Show Rewards screen, players are taken to the set but are unable to back out or navigate the menus requiring a title restart.
Grades could show as lit up for incomplete sets when viewing Gallery set rewards.
The Gallery level was not showing as intended when grading sets in certain situations.
When navigating the Gallery in Ultimate Team, players may have experienced an issue where backing out of a selected subset, closing a Reward Preview, or exiting the Tag Glossary automatically resets the menu focus to the very first item in the list instead of keeping the previously highlighted subset selected.
When completing Gallery objectives, no notification message would be displayed.
A menu sound effect could have triggered during matches whenever a player equipped with a Cosmetic Evolution that featured active visual effects (VFX) gained possession of the ball.
When loading into Ultimate Team, when navigating tabs on a message, this would reset to the first tab after entering Ultimate Team.
Addressed a delay when navigating certain live messages in Ultimate Team.
When entering Ultimate Team through the FC Hub, the News section could have been shown as blank.
In 2v2 matches, after performing a slide tackle in the goal area, players could have become stuck in the net and unable to move.
When applying an Evolution to a Goalkeeper, the upgraded stats in the preview would not be highlighted in green.
In some cases, sorting Objectives by priority displayed the Objectives in the incorrect order.
In specific scenarios, the Transfer Market search button may have stopped working.
Them compute costs sound insane, that October number finna have everybody watching
The way we were...
I've been wondering why there was such a rush to get the $ANT S-1 filed amidst a brutal sell-off in AI related names. Then I read the filing and it's painfully clear.
$ANT has scaled at a mind-boggling clip up until this point. Yes the company did generate operating cash flow and profits in 2Q26, but that no longer is representative of the business model going forward. With $500B+ of compute cost commitments with $MSFT $GOOG $AMZN and $SPCX and a $161B equipment lease with $AMD, the entire cost structure of this business is now changing under the "Anthropic Direct" initiative.
They're showing you that delivering inference was a structurally high margin business in 2Q26 (50%+ margin). Will it be going forward? Well they're sitting on something that looks like $85-100B in compute commitments ANNUALLY. As a point of reference they spent $5.5B in 2Q26 on compute. Even if they get towards $80B of ARR by year end (which could be optimistic), it's a big hurdle to get to profitability in 2027 unless ARR doubles (or more).
There is a placeholder for October 2026 ARR in the S-1. I cannot think of another single sentence in a SEC filing that will have more of an impact on the fate of capital markets than that one. My guess is everyone in the VC and tech community will up their Claude spend this month for that very reason.
Mikal retweeted
$ANT From the Anthropic S1 $SMH $MSFT $NBIS Revenue: $41M (2023) → $386M (2024) → $4,585M (2025) → $16.3B in H1 2026 alone (+1,300% year over year). That's roughly 3.5x all of 2025 in six months.
GAAP operating loss has narrowed to just $(693)M for H1 2026; on the adjusted basis they claim, operating income is +$1.6B (10% margin).
$131.7B in cash and short-term investments at June 30, 2026 ($112.4B cash + $19.3B investments). They've raised $141.1B in aggregate.
Governance is locked down tight: the founders' LLC holds Class F stock with 50.1% of the vote, public Class A is capped at 49.9% in aggregate, and the Long-Term Benefit Trust elects a board majority through Class T. It's a controlled company, and a public benefit corporation on top of that.
Ticker ANT applied for on Nasdaq. But this is an initial filing — price range, share count, and net proceeds are all blank so far, so no valuation yet.
Surprises
The compute commitments are on a scale I've never seen in an S-1: Google ≥$114.5B, Amazon ≥$110B, Microsoft ≥$44.9B, plus ~$245B in new commitments signed after June 30 and an estimated $125–150B more in TPU compute. Google and Amazon are simultaneously suppliers, creditors, and (via their stakes) shareholders.
A $1.5B copyright settlement (Bartz) was charged in 2025 and court-approved in July 2026 — and it's disclosed alongside June 2026 Commerce export restrictions on their Fable 5 / Mythos 5 models, later lifted.
The odd items: a 5% public-benefit share donation, a $2.0B Q3 donation-matching charge, a $15B revolver upsized in September 2026, and disclosed "revenue-forsaken" usage policies (they walk away from revenue on safety grounds).
Net revenue retention is stated at ~900% — essentially every customer grows enormously.
The good
80% of revenue is consumption-based (API usage), not subscriptions; compute cost has fallen to 55% of revenue; they count 11,900+ customers at $100K+ and claim all of the Fortune 10 as customers.
$6.6M revenue per employee — absurd operating leverage for a company this size.
New models (Claude Opus 5.5, Fable 5.1) are claimed to cut inference cost materially, which is the whole margin story.
The bad / watch out
The headline GAAP net loss for H1 2026 is $(80.7)B — almost entirely non-cash fair-value marks ($72.4B on converts/SAFEs), so it's accounting, not burn. But it will dominate every headline.
The real risk is structural: take-or-pay compute commitments vs usage-based revenue. If demand stalls, the commitments don't.
Customer concentration, heavy US data-center exposure, sales and marketing spend spiking, a PBC structure with untested litigation exposure, and no Q3 financials in this filing — the June 30 cutoff is already stale given the post-quarter commitments.
Key numbers
Revenue: 2023 $41M · 2024 $386M · 2025 $4,585M · H1 2026 $16,286M
GAAP operating loss H1 2026: $(693)M · Adjusted operating income: +$1,618M (10%)
GAAP net loss H1 2026: $(80.7)B (non-cash marks)
Cash + short-term investments: $131.7B · Capital raised: $141.1B
Compute commitments: Google ≥$114.5B · Amazon ≥$110B · Microsoft ≥$44.9B · ~$245B post-June additions
Control: Founder LLC 50.1% (Class F) · Public Class A capped 49.9% · LTBT board majority (Class T) $GOOGL
I'm good on that IPO with all them unlocks coming in 2027
ANTHROPIC'S IPO DOCUMENTS ARE CALMING DOWN THE MARKETS.
None of the numbers released today are that different from what we heard last week, but now we know how much cash they have.
Anthropic has $120B in cash and is likely raising $100B on the IPO. They are then likely going to be raising another $100B in debt, $60B of it already financed by BlackStone. If you assume a 3x in ARR, which probably is low considering how much the street wants them to grow, this company should have around $300-$400B in cash. This also doesn't take into account the future ATMs they might engage in.
So, the reason AI stocks are getting some relief right now is because it seems like Anthropic will have enough cash to pay their bills, which obviously is good for $NVDA, $SPCX, $AMD, $AVGO, $MU, and many other players.
However, there are going to be 24 separate unlocks in 2027. Those are going to be days where the market has to deal with a massive amount of supply coming onto the market. The company effectively has unilateral control, not shareholders, on deciding to pause or slow down the release of models. The open-weight models continue to be a threat as more enterprises are seeing the value in owning their AI for a significantly cheaper cost. Anthropic has outlined all these risks in the S1.
Regardless on if you are buying the IPO, it seems like there is enough cash they can raise to continue paying their bills and making sure the downstream value flows into most of the semis...if the market changes their mind on that or Anthropic stalls in growth, those names get hit. But if the company keeps growing and raises cash, the money should be there to fund the semis...it's now a question on how much of a risk people want to take in actually owning the stock.
Mikal retweeted
20 Claude AI prompts every entrepreneur should have in their toolkit. 🧡
Most people use AI to get quick answers.
Smart entrepreneurs use it to make better business decisions.
These 20 prompts can help you:
🟠 Validate business ideas before investing
🟠 Find profitable niches and analyze competitors
🟠 Build offers customers actually want
🟠 Create marketing and content strategies
🟠 Improve sales conversations and pricing
🟠 Plan revenue growth and business finances
🟠 Turn ideas into a practical 90-day action plan
Instead of starting from scratch, use these prompts as a foundation and customize them for your business.
Want the full list of prompts?
Comment “PROMPT” below, and save this post so you can revisit it when planning your next move.
♻️ Repost this for an entrepreneur who wants to work smarter with AI.
Follow @MarcelVelica for more AI, growth, and automation insights.
#ClaudeAI #ArtificialIntelligence #Entrepreneurship #AITools #BusinessGrowth
I be trying to keep everything in my head then wonder why I forget stuff 🤦🏾♂
BUSINESS PLANNING & SYSTEMS
Stop running your business from memory. Start building systems.
If you must remember every order, follow up with every customer yourself, and personally supervise every task, your business needs better processes.
Start small this week:
✅ Document how you handle orders.
✅ Create a checklist for recurring tasks.
✅ Record customer enquiries and follow-ups.
✅ Set a time to review your progress.
You don't need expensive software to get started.
A simple, documented process is better than a process that exists only in your head.
Your business grows stronger when your processes become repeatable.
What's one process you need to document this week?
Them commercials would've had me checking every corner of the house
🔮📚 Remember Time-Life’s ‘Mysteries of the Unknown’? Launched in 1987, these illustrated hardcover books explored UFOs, ghosts, psychic powers, witchcraft and other paranormal mysteries. With their eerie commercials, these books made the unexplained even more intriguing!
👻 Did you ever have any of these on your bookshelf?
Mikal retweeted
This week, we’ve unlocked Ernest Hemingway’s Art of Fiction interview from the archive. theparisreview.org/authors/3…
Sutter Hill being number one over all these firms is crazy
If there was an "on-base percentage" for venture capital, what would it look like?
It might involve looking at a firm's exposure to the world's most consequential tech companies.
Not just an arbitrary mark at an exit, where they may or may not have taken liquidity, but the subsequent compounding of those investments over time; using public markets as a sorting mechanism for quality.
For this ranking, we started with venture's greatest success stories, and worked backwards to find out who invested, when, and what fraction of their managed funds the investment represented.
The resulting list reflects the long-term performance of each firm's most successful portfolio companies, relative to capital deployed.
Other interesting features:
• Two firms in the top 10 were founded by the Draper dynasty (@shv and @DFJvc).
• Luke Nosek is a co-founder of two of the firms in the top 10 (@foundersfund and @gigafund).
• Founders Fund created more value than the bottom 22 firms put together, at $95.2B, primarily thanks to @SpaceX and @PalantirTech.
• If you rank by value alone, the top five firms are: Founders Fund ($95.2B), @sequoia ($82.6B), @Accel ($56.0B), @BessemerVP ($48.4B), @NEA ($33.0B).
• Seven out of the ten best performing funds were technically emerging managers, and four were debut funds.
(@iaventures I, @FirstMarkCap I, @Techstars Bullet Time I, @Lowercase I, Founders Fund II, @firstround II, Founders Fund III)
The top 10 firms are:
1 — Sutter Hill Ventures, founded by Paul M. Wythes and Bill Draper (William H. Draper III), in 1964
2 — Founders Fund, founded by Peter Thiel (@peterthiel), Ken Howery (@KenHowery), and Luke Nosek (@LukeNosek), in 2005
3 — IA Ventures, founded by Roger Ehrenberg (@infoarbitrage), in 2010
4 — Gigafund, founded by Luke Nosek (@LukeNosek) and Stephen Oskoui (@oskoui), in 2017
5 — Lowercase Capital, founded by Chris Sacca (@sacca), in 2010
6 — Pelion Venture Partners, founded by Jim Dreyfous (as Utah Ventures / UV Partners), in 1986
7 — Union Square Ventures, founded by Fred Wilson (@fredwilson) and Brad Burnham (@BradUSV), in 2003
8 — Benchmark, founded by Bob Kagle, Bruce Dunlevie, Andy Rachleff, Kevin Harvey, and Val Vaden, in 1995
9 — Bessemer Venture Partners, founded by Henry Phipps Jr. (as Bessemer Securities; VC arm formalized later), in 1911
10 — Draper Fisher Jurvetson, founded by Tim Draper (@TimDraper), in 1985
Read the write-up here:
blog.joinodin.com/p/the-top-…
Read more about the methodology and get the full report here:
top50.joinodin.com/
LinkedIn got yall doing a whole training camp just to send a DM 😂
lower ur cortisol:
> start a linkedin outbound agency
> pick a niche
> fix your profile
> warm your account
> build a list
> write the dm
> follow up twice
> reply fast
> stop checking your inbox every 10 minutes
linkedin outreach from start to finish...
1. pick a niche
look at your best client result and go after companies that look like that client
same industry. same size. same job title doing the buying
it should be narrow enough that you could name 10 of them right now
2. fix your profile
your headline says who you help and the result they get
"i help freight brokers book 20 shipper calls a month" works. "growth consultant" doesn't
use a real photo of your face and a banner that repeats the headline
3. warm your account BEFORE you send anything
a quiet account that suddenly sends 100 dms a day gets restricted
so spend 3 to 4 weeks using it like a normal person. connect with people in your niche. comment on their posts. post once or twice a week
4. build a list of 500 in sales navigator
filter by job title. company size. industry. location
then turn on "posted on linkedin in past 30 days" so you only get people who actually open the app and will see your dm
500 is enough to find out if the message works before you spend time building more
5. write the dm in 4 lines
saw [something that just changed]. usually means [the problem it causes]. we got [a similar company] [a result] in [time]. worth me sending [something small]?
filled in it looks like this:
"saw you just hired 2 new account execs. usually means the pipeline has to double to keep them busy. we got an aeo agency 12 qualified meetings in 2 weeks. worth me sending how we set it up?"
no intro. no compliment. no link. under 400 characters
write 3 versions with a different result in line 3. after a week keep the one getting the most replies
6. follow up twice
first follow up 3 to 4 days after the dm. the second one 7 to 10 days after that
no reply after that means you move on to the next name
7. reply fast
a positive reply that sits for 2 days goes cold
send every interested reply to ONE place like a slack channel. give it one owner. answer within the hour and book the call while your dm is still fresh in their head
congrats on the easiest way to get clients in 2026
I need examples before I believe anybody saying they great at hiring
When a founder tells me what they're great at, I ask why.
Then I ask why again. Five times.
Someone who genuinely has that strength can explain it in detail, even after five questions. Someone exaggerating their abilities will struggle to give specific answers.
Say a founder tells me: "I'm great at hiring and inspiring people."
1. Why do you think that?
2. Tell me about a time you did it.
3. Who would you hire first?
4. Why them?
5. How did you get better at it?
When the strength is real, the answers get deeper and more specific every time.
It works for experience too. "I built an Android operating system." Great. Were you leading it?
Or were you one of 50 people on the team, and the one getting coffee every day?
Police have used the same approach for a very long time to work out whether someone is telling the truth.
So before your next pitch, run it on yourself first. Pick your biggest claim and ask why five times.
If you can't get to the fifth answer, neither will the investor.
Being the person everybody comes to for one thing is a cheat code
You see those provision stores where you sell everything, from biscuits to detergents, noodles and beverages? Sometimes, you can sell plenty of goods and still make very little profit.
Six years ago, I facilitated a ₦1 million business support facility for Mama Ada who was into the sub-distribution of noodles.
Three years later, her business had grown to the point where her credit request has increased to ₦10 million.
From experience, It is more profitable to focus on one FMCG product and build a strong customer base around it.
Mama Ada explained to me how she became the only wholesaler selling noodles in her local market.
Most of the retailers in her neighbourhood buy from her because they can make over ₦1,000 in profit on a carton, depending on the brand.
For her, she buys noodles in bulk and supplies retailers who depend on her for regular stock at a cheaper rate.
She buys from distributors and his distributors need reliable sub-agents who can buy consistently, help them meet sales targets and earn rebates and incentives from manufacturers.
So to keep the business growing, these sub-agents often need financing to increase their stock and meet demand. That was how I met Mama Ada.
Her business generate regular cash flow because retailers need to replenish their stock frequently as demand increases.
Today, her business has grown significantly from where it was when I first financed her.
To those working in the bank or fintech across business development and credit financing, pay attention to FMCG distributors and their agent networks.
One relationship with a distributor can open doors to several sub-agents.
Taking attachments out after the beta is crazy just let us use em 😭
