Latest / AST SpaceMobile Podcast / Anpanman - Potential for US Gov stake?

Transcript

Anpanman - Potential for US Gov stake? · AST SpaceMobile Podcast

0:06
This is the AST Space Mobile podcast.
0:10
Where we just basically turn your phone be seamless
0:14
regardless of where you are. We don't want the user even to
0:16
know that it's connected by satellite.
0:21
Listen, the opportunity that we have is very, very, very large.
0:28
Hello everyone. Thanks for joining this ad hoc
0:32
space. I just decided to fire this up
0:35
because I wanted to cover this topic that quite frankly, I
0:39
didn't really prepare anything. But I've just been having some
0:42
conversations with various people, cook, tut, and others.
0:47
And I just figured might be good to just cover this topic because
0:51
I think it is something that if you'd asked me a few months ago
0:57
if it was possible or if it made any sense, I would have kind of
1:00
dismissed it. But then I think Fast forward to
1:03
today, where we are and give them the, the nature and state
1:08
of, of how a government, U.S. government is looking at what
1:11
industries are strategic and you know what, what areas they want
1:15
to Foster and protect and grow. I think this whole idea of
1:23
government potentially taking stakes in some of these newer
1:27
space companies actually makes quite a bit of sense, especially
1:30
in the context of future awards around defense contracts and
1:35
especially Golden Dome, and just given the time frame that that
1:40
actually needs to happen. So so yeah, I, I wanted to have
1:44
a space and just discuss it briefly.
1:46
I'm not planning to do a 2 hour space again.
1:50
And also encourage people if you have questions or even if you
1:53
want to come up at some point, maybe we can have more
1:57
interaction, interactive discussion.
1:59
But but yeah, what a week, right?
2:03
I think Cooke covered this quite a bit yesterday evening.
2:06
But you know, given where the markets are right now relative
2:10
to where we were Friday after the close, which, you know, we
2:13
had obviously AST sorry, Wenberg squawk going off when we turn
2:20
this off. But yeah, AST Space Mobile,
2:22
obviously, we were all very excited about the Bluebird 6,
2:27
which now we know is the only satellite that's on the Antonov,
2:30
which got picked up over the weekend and it's on its way to
2:33
India. Bluebird 7, from what we can
2:37
tell, I think it's pretty close to your being done and that will
2:41
be on a flatbed truck out to Cape Canaveral.
2:44
I'm sure we'll get APR at some point or maybe perhaps move this
2:47
loose out there, might be able to figure out when, when that
2:52
that actually ships. But but yeah, it's an exciting
2:54
time. We're on the cusp of launching
2:57
multiple satellites with the view towards commercial service
3:00
in 2026. And so, so yeah, it's a, it's a
3:05
exciting time to be an investor. I will just point out how
3:09
amazing this community is. I was thinking about it before I
3:13
went to bed last night, how when I worked at a hedge fund, there
3:17
was there would have been no way that I would have been able to
3:20
gather the amount of due diligence and intelligence that
3:24
this community brings. And the reason why it came up to
3:27
mind is that there was, you know, there's there's clearly a
3:31
ton of people who only as DJs mobile out there, some who are
3:34
quite vocal, some who are silent.
3:37
But last night someone had talked about how the Antonov had
3:41
disappeared from flight tracking after lightning in Alaska.
3:44
And then a, a shareholder came forward on Twitter and said, Oh
3:48
yeah, you know, usually they turn the transponder off when
3:52
they're parked. And you, the crew might be, you
3:54
know, before a very long all day of flying, before a long flight
3:57
ahead of them. They might actually, you know,
4:00
bed for the evening in that particular city.
4:02
And so you, you have flight trackers that are off.
4:06
And then I think someone asked this person this, who I
4:09
understand is a stay at home mom.
4:11
Now you know where what what came in this view and then this,
4:15
this mother said, well, I used to fly air cargo all over the
4:18
world. And so this is just part of like
4:20
normal operating procedure and and of course, this person also
4:25
owned shares of ASD space mobile.
4:27
So that's kind of the cool aspect of this community.
4:31
The the level of due diligence and the knowledge base is just
4:35
so deep. And so, you know, whether that's
4:38
people who are showing up at in New Hampshire or Dallas, Fort
4:43
Worth or Alaska or of course Midland, taking pictures of the
4:48
plane as it lands and gets loaded and takes off again, it's
4:52
just, yeah, it's unparalleled how much brain power we have in
4:57
this community. So just wanted to point that
5:00
out. But yeah, so fast, you know,
5:05
Friday, the reason why I mentioned Friday is that we're
5:07
obviously this potential Trump, Trump, you know, tariff war with
5:11
China. You know, that got the market on
5:13
edge, unfortunately for people who were invested in crypto,
5:17
which I didn't fully understand why the the drawdown was so bad
5:22
for people. But but then as as more stories
5:25
came out of people getting liquidated and you know, we can
5:28
do a whole entire separate Twitter space on on that.
5:33
But it sounds like, you know, people were leveraged up to 50
5:37
times or 30 times on perpetual eat futures, which is a crazy
5:42
thing to do given the underlying ball of the assets that you're
5:46
leveraging. But yeah, with the the tariff
5:49
news obviously sending markets down, we saw ASD space mobile
5:52
trade down to as low as 7576. You know, perhaps there were
5:57
people who were margins who were selling, but then probably short
6:00
sellers who thought they're being smart and shorting the
6:03
whole not looking so smart today.
6:06
But but as part of that terraform, there's this there's
6:10
you know, that caused a renewed focus on the strategically
6:14
important industries. And so whether that's rare
6:18
earths like MPUSAR and you know, TMQ, any number of these names.
6:25
So that's just like, you know, that's the inputs.
6:27
Lac lithium, that's just the inputs.
6:30
But then I think and a play playing that for to be the
6:34
government. So the government is clearly
6:36
trying to foster these these sectors that, you know, are
6:43
where, for example, rare earths were heavily reliant on China or
6:47
other, you know, other countries or regions that are unstable.
6:52
And So what the US is trying to do is, is help foster what, you
6:56
know, development of, of these resources either domestically
7:00
or, or in areas that are friendly to the US.
7:05
And by doing so, by taking economic stakes in these
7:08
companies, whether I think an MP, they, they, they actually
7:12
put in money and got, I believe it was a 10% stay back.
7:16
And then of course, shortly after that, and this when the
7:18
stock was I think under 30, but Apple entered into a strategic
7:23
supply agreement, invested money as well.
7:25
And then, you know, MP went from I think it was the 20s to where
7:29
it is today, which is almost 100.
7:32
But the key thing that the government, U.S. government is
7:34
doing here is that they're trying to help foster these
7:38
areas that they think are strategic.
7:40
And, you know, they may not be economically viable today or
7:43
they have a lot of risk. But typically for an area that
7:47
is highly strategic, that's where you have the government
7:49
step in, where private investors may not want to take a risk for
7:53
the government. U.S. government comes in and
7:54
says, hey, this is really important.
7:57
It's important to national security.
7:58
So we're going to step in and we're going to take an economic
8:01
stake. And So what does that mean?
8:02
So in the case of these uneconomic rare earth mines,
8:09
they can't produce anything economically, you know, relative
8:12
to where the market is and especially competing with China.
8:15
But with the US taking a stake and the stock price is trading
8:18
up significantly, that, you know, that lowers our cost of
8:21
capital. It also makes the USA de facto
8:26
kind of backstop for these companies.
8:27
So if there are troubles ahead, you know, we can some people
8:31
talk about moral hazard like, you know, if you if the US takes
8:35
stake in these companies and then what if they do bad things?
8:37
It it'll just teach investors that there is no more hazard and
8:40
people take even more risks and then bad things can happen.
8:43
We kind of went through this in the financial crisis in 2008,
8:47
where believe it or not, which I mean, it was for good reason,
8:51
But when the financial system was on the brink of collapse,
8:55
the US government had to step in and enforce not not by choice,
8:59
but it forced every bank regional, you know, large, large
9:04
national banks are pretty much forced every financial services
9:08
firm to take preferred equity from the US government.
9:11
The reason why they, the US did that is if, if you guys, for
9:15
some of you, perhaps they were too young.
9:18
All these financial firms are failing because it was a crisis
9:20
of confidence like back then when, when you had all the, the,
9:26
the, the subprime loans from houses and, you know, all
9:31
package it into CL OS and, you know, basically the entire
9:36
financial system collapse when these things started unwinding
9:38
and, and of course house values went down.
9:41
There was essentially a run on the, on all these banks.
9:44
And so the US government had to step in.
9:47
You know what, Warren Buffett came in, he took a stake in
9:49
Goldman Sachs and he did. And, you know, various people
9:51
were trying to do deals, but that didn't really stem the
9:55
bleeding until the US government stepped in and said we are
9:59
basically going to act as the financial backstop to all these
10:02
financial services firms. And so whether you have a
10:07
deposit at Bank of America or, you know, Fargo or hedge fund
10:13
that has it's at a prime, prime occur, you know, whether that
10:16
was Morgan Stanley or some other firm, but your stuff is safe
10:20
because we are implicitly backing it by taking a stake.
10:23
And that's what really stopped the spiral downward in 2008.
10:28
And of course, back then, you know, there was a Democratic, it
10:33
was Obama was in power at the time and, and, and, you know,
10:37
Democrats were in favor of this. Republicans were against it
10:40
because of moral hazard. And, you know, we don't want
10:42
government intervention. But when shit really hit the
10:45
fan, everybody came together and passed sharp because you know, I
10:51
remember living through that period of time when the
10:53
financial system was on the other point of collapse.
10:57
We really were pretty close to this point where we were going
11:01
to have to be forced to pay for things with rocks because
11:05
everything was was was on the on the brink of collapse.
11:09
Then the reason why I mentioned that is there is a template for
11:12
this, right? So you having some level of our
11:16
intervention or Fast forward to COVID Project Warp Speed, where
11:21
whether you believe in vaccines or not, the government decided
11:24
like, yeah, developing vaccines is pretty important to use to,
11:28
to fight against COVID. And so there was funding and,
11:32
and, you know, easing of regulatory measures in order to
11:37
make that happen. And so there was a template for
11:39
this stuff. I, I know obviously now people
11:42
are debating whether it makes sense for the US government to
11:46
take stakes in some of these rare companies, which me
11:50
personally, I think it makes a ton of sense.
11:52
I think a lot of these companies in terms of the risk of
11:56
developing these mines and of course the regulatory hair that
12:00
goes along with it. I mean, part of the reason why
12:02
China is so far ahead in terms of rare earths development is
12:06
that they have lacks regulations or mistakes as like we're going
12:10
to do this and they do it and they just push it through.
12:14
I think given how critical some of these strategic minerals are
12:19
to the USI think we need something similar along those
12:22
lines. Obviously not putting public
12:24
safety at jeopardy. But the fact that if the, if the
12:28
US government can take a stake in one of these companies and
12:31
really lower their their cost of capital and also get the beer
12:35
cats in Washington to focus on it as an issue to push through
12:39
these these programs from regulatory perspective.
12:42
I think that's a net positive because I think I'm not a middle
12:46
expert or anything. But when it comes to where it's
12:49
just not really a dearth of digging the stuff out of the
12:52
ground, but it's actually the process of taking what you take
12:56
out of the ground and, and, you know, refining it, processing it
13:00
to the end product, which you know that that process results
13:03
in, in waste materials and other things that that obviously we
13:09
got to figure out how to deal with.
13:10
But but yeah, so I, I personally just given the nature of our
13:16
relationship with China, I think it is important for the US to
13:19
develop and, and its ally to develop alternative sources for
13:23
whether it's uranium, lithium, any number, tungsten.
13:28
I mean, seems like every day you read about a different mineral
13:31
that's, that's really important that we don't have, but then the
13:34
Chinese have. And so I think it's smart for
13:38
the US to participate in some of these things.
13:41
I mean, yeah, I guess it's kind of funny how, you know, you have
13:44
some politicians who are anti clean energy, but now they're
13:48
like all about strategic minerals.
13:51
When in fact, I think clean energy and strategic minerals
13:55
are kind of one in the same. I I've talked about this a
13:57
little bit, how, you know, people are poo pooing on solar
14:01
right now. But if you look at the demand
14:04
for AI, we're going to need every single drop of energy from
14:08
every single source for the next 20 years.
14:10
Otherwise, you know, this is before some of these modular
14:14
nuclear reactor companies come online and make that a reality.
14:19
But you're going to need wind. You're going to need the, the
14:21
feared, sorry, the the windmills that that President Trump
14:28
despises. I mean, you're going to need
14:29
those. You're going to get hydro,
14:31
you're going to need solar. You need all these things.
14:33
But anyway, that's a long winded intro.
14:36
The reason why I think so, yeah, I've been trying to get smart
14:39
and all this stuff. And I think taking a step back,
14:43
if you, if you consider who our biggest adversary is in space
14:48
and the importance of space, whether that's related to
14:51
connectivity, future commerce. But then also from military
14:55
perspective, our biggest adversaries are Russia and China
14:58
right now. And Russia I, I think still
15:01
important. You know, the biggest, I guess
15:05
concern about Russia is that they've developed anti satellite
15:08
weaponry and, and we all know if there is a, if there is some
15:15
type of, you know, exchange or or battle in space, The
15:22
repercussions of that is if, if things get really heated and,
15:25
and you have satellites, you know, it's one thing for
15:27
satellites to grapple each other and take each other out.
15:29
But if you actually has weapons that destroy satellites, you
15:33
know, that would be that would basically shut down space
15:35
overall, just given the debris that would be out there.
15:38
You'd have, you know, the Kessler syndrome, as we we've
15:41
all talked about, which is greatly feared.
15:43
But if there truly is some type of conflict in space, then that
15:48
would make space unusable, which is it's important that I think
15:51
all parties recognize that. And you know, the benefits of of
15:55
space exploration, having assets in space are obviously, I mean,
15:59
I don't need to educate everyone here, but that's really
16:02
important. And I think that outweighs the
16:05
militarization of space. That said, for defensive
16:08
purposes, especially here on Earth, space is going to play a
16:12
huge role. And so when I talk about the
16:15
government potentially taking stakes, what does that mean?
16:19
If you look at the the large primes, whether that's Lockheed
16:23
Martin, Boeing, you got some of these bigger names, those
16:26
companies by default, they're they're de facto government
16:29
sponsored. The reason why I say that is
16:31
they they drive a pretty material or in some cases the
16:34
majority of their revenues from the government, whether that's
16:39
on the defense or commercial side.
16:40
But you know, but for all intents and purposes, like they
16:43
are supported by the government and I think people fully
16:47
understand that. But I think where the potential
16:51
for the US government to take stakes and it, it could be, it
16:55
may not just be a, an equity stake, but it could be also
16:58
loans which, you know, for AST space mobile, we've talked about
17:02
import expert bank loans. You know that I think the reason
17:07
why the government might contemplate doing so is that
17:10
spaces is a critical vertical, I'm sorry, sector that the, that
17:15
the US government is interested in.
17:16
It's a, it's a contested area, increasingly in contested area
17:20
where China is looking to dominate.
17:22
What I mean by that is if you look at China's launch
17:25
capability, they're, they're the second best, the second most
17:29
capable and best launch provider out there relative, you know, in
17:33
terms of total tonnage that's sent up space, second only in
17:36
SpaceX and they're, they're continually improving that
17:39
program. But, you know, China's already,
17:43
they've already outlined their their future where they're
17:47
already putting up a, you know, a fixed wireless competitor to
17:52
Starlink. And then as many space mobile
17:55
investors know, they've already, at least in terms of graphics,
17:59
they've already developed a almost carving copy of Block 1
18:02
satellites that they are, you know, who knows, like how much
18:06
of it is vaporware or real, but they've at least made a computer
18:09
graphic of it. And so they've in, you know,
18:12
reading the Chinese press, they view directed devices, a very
18:16
critical area, high growth. And so I wouldn't you know, I, I
18:20
would just assume that they are going to put up a constellation
18:22
to compete. And so, you know, is that a
18:25
concern? I think importantly when it
18:29
comes on the commercial side, there is going to be room on
18:32
let's let's kind of bucket these into two areas. 1 is the Western
18:37
world or allies with the USI think Starlink and ASD Space
18:42
Mobile will be the two dominant players of that market and
18:46
that's going to be very attractive market.
18:48
Obviously, the US market is the biggest and most thoughtful
18:50
wireless market in the world. And so, you know, currently ASTS
18:54
working with AT&T and Verizon and then Starlink is working
18:57
with T-Mobile, but then extended beyond that for the Western
19:01
world, you're going to, you know, obviously M and OS are
19:05
going to pick between one of those two companies.
19:08
AST has 50 M and OS today and Starlink now has I believe 9 if
19:13
we count Boost Mobile. And so that's from the Western
19:17
world, whereas I think China will develop their own
19:19
consolation and they'll service countries that are either allied
19:25
with them or probably more open to I guess the potential risks,
19:31
right. So whether that's Iran, Russia,
19:37
yeah, some North Korea, and then perhaps some developing
19:41
countries where they might, they might be forced to take the
19:44
service. As some of you guys probably
19:48
know, throughout history or more recent history, China helped
19:52
develop mineral resources in a lot of African countries.
19:55
But as part of that, they also forced these countries to take
19:59
hallway equipment, for example, or other things because they.
20:03
At the end of the day, in exchange for Dalman rice, they
20:06
basically had to become consumers of Chinese equipment
20:09
and and and monitoring for that matter.
20:14
But yeah, so, so this area is highly critical and strategic
20:19
for the US one from a commercial standpoint of having global
20:24
leadership. And I think having used these
20:26
two small one Starling kind of being the tip of the spear is,
20:29
is great because for all intents purposes, ACS leader in
20:33
technology, Starlink will eventually get there and have
20:37
have a good product too. But I think from a strategic
20:42
perspective, looking at defense capabilities, AST space mobile
20:45
has very unique things that it can offer, which we've discussed
20:49
whether I think Scott has publicly disclosed that there's
20:53
they they see 10 use cases that are non communication use cases
20:57
for defense. And so we've seen SDADIU, all
21:01
the branch armed forces branches, all testing and
21:05
working with AST Space Mobile, then of course the big one,
21:09
which is Golden Dome ASTL from bar work.
21:14
We have reason to believe that AST will be an important, if not
21:18
critical piece to Golden Dome. And so therein lies, you know,
21:23
the potential, I think for the government to contemplate taking
21:26
a stake in the company. The reason why that would make
21:29
sense it going back to the primes, you know, as as I said
21:34
before, those are large organizations.
21:35
They get hundreds of millions of dollars from U.S. government and
21:40
they, you know, for all purposes, those are supported
21:44
and the factor backed by the US government.
21:46
Whereas I think whether it's HT space mobile, some of these
21:49
other companies that are kind of newer players, Rocket Lab would
21:52
fit in that category. Black Sky kind of fits in that
21:57
category. I mean, Black Sky gets I think
21:59
like over 90% of its revenues, US carvements.
22:02
And so I think they're viewed as grateful.
22:05
But yeah, so for some of these next generation space companies,
22:10
which I would argue depending on their level of involvement in
22:16
Golden Dome or some of these other defense contracts, I think
22:18
they're going to be viewed as important to US National
22:22
Security. And so that's why I think the
22:25
potential for them to get some type of investment from the US
22:30
or perhaps loans from the USI think is pretty high.
22:34
So maybe if it was like, I don't know, four or five months ago,
22:39
again, if you had asked me if this was a possibility, I would
22:42
have kind of downplayed it. Whereas nowadays I, I think it's
22:45
probably like a 20 to 25% probability that the US could
22:49
take the stake in AST Space mobile.
22:52
And I know like people have pushed back and said, well, you
22:54
know, if the US takes a stake, an equity stake in Space Mobile,
22:59
could that jeopardize some of the work that it's doing around
23:02
the world with some of these MN OS perhaps like for example, in
23:07
Europe AS CS working Vodafone through their satellite go
23:12
venture, joint venture to to service Europe.
23:15
And one of the things that they've touted their is
23:17
sovereignty. I don't think from my
23:20
perspective. So Sato JV is the majority owned
23:23
by Vodafone. AST is going to be a minority
23:26
owner and then of course, you're going to have like other
23:28
European M and OS join that. And then that that entity is
23:32
going to have control over the assets once you know, when
23:35
they're flying over Europe. And so, you know, theoretically
23:39
AST is not going to have the ability to to, you know, tinker
23:43
around with that. They were through the
23:45
discovering process, which you know, it, it depends on how we
23:48
set it up, but I think it'll be ring fenced from AST.
23:51
So it will truly have, I mean, AST you have board numbers and
23:53
they will have the ability to help, you know, drive decisions,
23:57
but they're, they're not going to have majority of the board
23:59
there. And so I think the sovereignty
24:01
is going to be from that perspective would be retained.
24:05
And when I mentioned earlier or in the tweet that a 5 to 10%
24:10
stake would be passive, it would just be an equity stake, right?
24:13
Like I don't think the government would demand a board
24:16
seat and they haven't done that for any of these private
24:18
entities before, but they would just be, it'd be basically a
24:22
vote of confidence that this company is important.
24:25
Strategically, we're going to take an equity stake because we
24:28
believe in it. By taking this equity stake, we
24:31
are in essence like, you know, reducing the cost of capital for
24:35
this company that is, is so strategic that they're working
24:38
on Golden Dome and some of these other things for us.
24:41
And so that's why we are implicitly backing them.
24:46
And I think that from AUS perspective, it's important
24:49
because if you're relying on some of these emerging companies
24:55
that are on the cusp of commercialization, you know, the
24:58
technology is important, but obviously they're not, they're
25:01
not there yet in terms of generating financial, you know,
25:06
they're not generating revenues and cash flows that can support
25:09
them fully. They they still are obviously
25:11
burning through cash. You know, perhaps this is a way
25:15
for the US government to, you know, give a vote of confidence,
25:19
but then also, you know, lower their cost capital, I think.
25:24
And I, I tweeted about this before.
25:27
You know, some people have said, well, what, why would the
25:33
company take it? What if they, what, why don't
25:35
they just like, you know, it's too political and they should
25:37
just not take it? I don't think the company has a
25:40
choice, right? Like obviously if you talk to
25:43
management, they'll probably just kind of talk it down or
25:45
whatever. But if you're I, I guess I'd put
25:48
it this way, the government, if they decide they're going to
25:51
take a stake in your company, they're going to make an offer
25:54
you can't refuse. What I mean by that is they're
25:57
going to say, yeah, here's a billion dollar Golden Dome award
26:01
and we're going to, we're going to pay you that and you're going
26:04
to be a critical part of this. But in order to participate, we
26:07
have to take a 5% passive stake in your company.
26:10
And you know what? We'll, we'll, I don't know.
26:11
We'll pay for the shares, we'll pay a premium, whatever.
26:14
But we need a stake because we want to know like what's going
26:18
on. And we want, we want to make
26:20
sure that your company is going to succeed.
26:23
And we need to have this, this, this toehold to let the market
26:29
know that, you know, this basically like, you know, these,
26:32
this company is untouchable. And what I mean by that is, you
26:36
know, whether it's Rocket Lab or HD space Mobile or I mean you,
26:41
you name it, like MPUSARA, lot of these like early stage
26:45
companies or highly risky companies, you know, the short
26:48
interest in all of them were really high.
26:49
But once the US, once the US government takes a stake in
26:52
your, if the, if the US government were to take a 5 to
26:55
10% stake in ASD space mobile, like as a short seller, what do
27:01
you do? You, you can't be short.
27:03
Like it's, it's, you know, if you're, if your goal is to drive
27:09
the company stock price down And yeah, whether it's creating fun
27:12
or, you know, there's delays here or whatever, like the fact
27:14
that the government is taking a stake in the company has done
27:18
their due diligence. You know, they've, they've
27:20
talked with all the branches of the armed forces that and, and
27:25
space development Agency that has already conducted testing
27:28
with Blue Walker 3 and and Black 1 satellites.
27:30
And they're like, hey, yeah, these guys have it.
27:32
We need this to accomplish you. So I want you to, you know,
27:35
they, they talk to the other bureaucrats.
27:37
They say we need to take a stake in the company.
27:39
Like, I just don't know how if you're short, that's like a
27:43
career ended move, right? Because and that's actually kind
27:46
of what you're seeing today and maybe perhaps over the last week
27:50
or so is as these investment banks put out these lists, I
27:55
think it was like Morgan Stanley the other day, JP Morgan today.
27:58
Not only are they putting out a list of like, here's a bunch of
28:00
strategic stuff that makes sense for the government to go invest
28:03
in. And by the way, like we're going
28:04
to go plow $10 billion for our own into it as well because we
28:08
agree like this stuff is strategic.
28:10
So we need to own it and we're going to ride that that.
28:15
And that's why I ran this poll earlier today, which is if we
28:20
were, you know, if I'm a risk manager at Millennium or Citadel
28:24
and some guys running like a, a $500 million sleeve of Capital a
28:29
pod and they're, they had this like 25 year old analyst who's
28:34
just hot and heavy that AC space mold due to satellite production
28:38
delays. You know, the downside is like
28:40
$10 in stock. You don't go from 90 to to 80 or
28:43
or 75 or whatever. I'm a risk manager.
28:46
I'm walking in and I read a report from an investment bank
28:49
saying, oh, space is strategic, which by the way, like the FCC
28:53
declared October space month. And you know, Donald Trump is
28:57
talked to, talked about how and you know, chair car, Senator
29:03
Cruz, I mean, you name it. Everybody is like we need to
29:06
lead space. We cannot let the Chinese win
29:09
that game, right? We need to be, we need to be the
29:12
first to the moon. We need to be the first to Mars,
29:14
you know, God bless a lot. Like he's helping in that
29:16
endeavor, but we need to be later.
29:19
And the Trump administration has made, they've hit, they've made
29:24
that abundantly clear. And so, yeah, if you're a risk
29:28
manager at Citadel and you walk in and, and some guy, some kid
29:33
that stole his PM, like, yeah, well, you should be short $100
29:36
million of ASTC small because I think they're going to miss the,
29:39
I don't know, launch deadline by a month or two or or maybe
29:44
you're going to run out of funding in two years.
29:47
You're going to walk in and say, why are we short this thing?
29:50
Like, tell me, you know, analysts, what happens if the
29:53
government takes a 5% stake in this company?
29:56
Where is the stock going to go? You're going to ask, you know,
29:59
what's the short interest, which I guess as of today is like
30:04
42,000,000 shares, you know, depending, I'm not sure how many
30:08
are related to convert. Maybe it's like 10 million
30:10
shares by now, but I don't know, 30 million shares.
30:12
Like the day that the government announces a 5% stake or 10%
30:17
stake, or they don't even have to announce it.
30:18
Like what if Wall Street Journal says, hey, the US government is
30:21
contemplating petrol investments and various space companies.
30:26
Then like that day, you will get blown to Kingdom come and you
30:30
will have to cover your shares. And so I think you're starting
30:33
to see some of that movement where people are kind of
30:36
thinking more broadly because as investors, that's what we're
30:39
supposed to do. OK.
30:40
The government has, you know, when the government took a stake
30:43
in Intel and MP, everybody was like, oh, OK, so maybe these are
30:48
like one off things. Obviously Intel is having
30:51
issues, but then the government sees, you know, having foundry
30:56
capacity and obviously R&D around CP US is important for
31:02
the US competitive, you know, US competitiveness.
31:05
And so they took a stake there, right?
31:07
And it's kind of funny because like I think the the the Trump
31:13
administration floated some negative stuff about the CEO of
31:16
Intel because maybe the CEO was didn't want to take the
31:19
investment initially. But then after that those
31:21
articles came out and they met all the sudden Intel's like,
31:23
yeah, we'll take the investment, which has been good for Intel,
31:25
right? The, the stock is up.
31:27
The government's make money on it as well.
31:29
And I do think industries like semiconductors are industries
31:34
that we should be supporting and investing in, you know,
31:38
sometimes people and if poo poo and say, well, that's not
31:41
capitalism, we shouldn't, you know, these industries shouldn't
31:44
be relying on government funds or, or backing.
31:47
But I think it's important like for some of these areas that are
31:52
highly critical and are super risky.
31:56
I don't know if everyone remembers like the whole
31:59
development for ASMLI mean you had a number of large
32:02
semiconductor players get together and make strategic
32:05
investments to make ASMLS lithography next generation.
32:09
Look, yeah, lithography machines a reality because there was just
32:13
so much risk involved and capital that no one player, not
32:18
even the company itself could take that risk.
32:20
But it needed a consortium of, of large players to go put the
32:24
capital in, in order to make that reality, to basically
32:27
extend the, the miniaturation of semiconductors with ultraviolet
32:32
lights. And so here I think you can
32:36
argue the same thing for space where, you know, AC space mobile
32:41
has been blessed that they're they're pre empty next
32:44
generation consolation. It's going to launch commercial
32:46
service in 2026. But then if the US government
32:49
views it as strategically critical and important, why
32:54
wouldn't they just take a 5% stake in exchange for Golden
32:58
Dome award and other military work that by the way, the
33:02
company already has 6 military contracts and those Scott has
33:06
been very open about those expanding from smallish size to
33:11
then hundreds of millions the size or the potential for that.
33:14
If this company is that strategic to the US government,
33:18
then to me it's, it's almost a no brainer.
33:22
You know, obviously I don't, I'm not in government and I don't
33:24
know what they're thinking. But you know, some might argue,
33:27
well, why doesn't the US government do that with Starlink
33:30
and SpaceX? Well, the US government over
33:33
SpaceX is by default already US backed.
33:35
I mean, that's how SpaceX became so, so successful and that they
33:42
won all this U.S. government business.
33:45
And they obviously whether that's through Starlink, but
33:49
also with their start Shield program, they already, they
33:52
already get a lot of awards. And so they're kind of already
33:55
past Max Q where from a commercial perspective, they're
34:00
doing just fine. But I think for some of these
34:02
smaller companies that have tremendous strategic importance
34:07
to the US. And what I mean by that is not
34:09
just the military aspects, but also communications.
34:11
I mean, Can you imagine a world where and today we, we saw, I
34:18
think Vodafone had a, a blackout on its network in the UK.
34:22
Once ACC mobile is up and running, it will AST satellites
34:27
will be able to light up that spectrum and bring service back
34:29
on during, during independency of, you know, Vodafone and
34:35
fixing their network to get it back up.
34:36
And so in the US, if a bad actor were to try to take down parts
34:41
of our, our network, which by the way, I don't know if you
34:44
guys saw the news, but there was like, I think what the, the UN
34:48
met, maybe it was a month ago, they actually caught these,
34:52
these guys who were planning to overload the cell networks in,
34:55
in New York City to for what purpose?
34:57
I'm not really sure. But in that type of instance
35:01
where cell towers were taken down, you know, having a backup
35:06
network that can communicate with everyday cell phones is, is
35:09
highly important. And so whether that's, you know,
35:12
for a first responder, like Firstnet type of use cases, but
35:16
also have informed if we have another incident or weather
35:21
issue, you know, having the backup network is, is critical
35:25
to national security. And then then of course, you
35:28
know, we've talked about like PNT, like an alternative GPS,
35:32
any, any number of applications. And so, so, yeah, so that's,
35:36
that's, I mean, when I talked about it with some of the other
35:41
folks are in the space mob, we kind of all come to the
35:44
conclusion it just makes a ton of sense.
35:46
That's, you know, that being said, I'm not, you know, who
35:49
knows if the government will take a stake, but I think the
35:52
risk is there risk meaning to the upside, right?
35:55
And so, and I think you're seeing that a lot of the, you
36:01
know, critical mineral companies, next generation
36:04
nuclear, you know, power development companies, I mean,
36:08
any number of industries, right? And so I think, I think for
36:11
space, this definitely holds true because the end if you if
36:14
you take a step back and look at where the US uses critical
36:19
strategically and where it wants to lead and an area where China
36:24
is not a parity yet, but pretty close that space.
36:30
And that's space communications. That's, you know, observation
36:34
that's launched, that's, that's pretty much everything in the
36:37
sector. And so I think that's why, you
36:41
know, whether you have these massive headlines of the
36:43
government taking stakes in the companies or giving them cheap
36:46
loans, there's a whole host of things that that can transpire.
36:50
And I think as a shoulder, that's something that we should
36:53
be ready for in case it does happen.
36:56
And I think if you're if you're short, you should be ready for
37:00
that too, because it can be a career ending.
37:01
I think if we were to walk in and I did a poll.
37:07
So let me just see what the results are.
37:10
I did a poll earlier today, you know, if if we saw that
37:15
Bloomberg Wall Street Journal run a story that the US
37:17
government is considering a 5 to 10% passive equity investment
37:21
AST or the stock or shares trade.
37:24
It looks like, and I guess this is just people's over
37:28
enthusiasm, but maybe not. I think the biggest, the the
37:33
number of highest votes went to $200 or 150, which is basically
37:36
doubling of the stock which overnight and of course if it's
37:39
a Bloomberg or. Wall Street Journal article that
37:43
means. It hasn't happened yet, but if
37:46
you look at like Lac or TMQUSARMP, you know, once
37:52
there's rumors out there and then once they become reality,
37:56
you know, in those instances the stocks doubled or tripled.
37:59
And I, I don't know what the short interest dynamics were
38:01
there, but I'm sure that had quite a bit to do with it as
38:05
well. But yeah, I think, I think it it
38:11
the probability is higher. Than the market thinks.
38:13
And, and I, I personally would view it positively.
38:17
I know some people don't view it as positively or thinks, think
38:21
it might impact our ability to do deals around the world, but
38:23
I, I don't, I personally don't think so.
38:26
As long as it's a, a passive stake, it doesn't come with
38:29
board seats or anything like that.
38:30
And as we've seen with some of these other investments, there
38:34
really isn't much in terms of strings attached.
38:37
And I think as I mentioned. Before the whole.
38:41
Before, well, yeah, initially it was kind of a focus around
38:45
critical minerals and things like that.
38:46
But then I think the strategic investment in Intel kind of
38:50
changed the game where it's like, OK, these guys are looking
38:53
beyond just natural resources, which obviously are risky and
38:57
require a lot of capital to develop and, you know, have to
39:00
get through regulatory hoops. But now they're moving.
39:02
They're thinking like much more broadly, they're going above
39:07
just inputs, but they're going to industries that are
39:09
strategic. And so, so I think again, I
39:14
think I need the the potential is there and and something that
39:19
space mobile. Investors should calibrate.
39:21
Towards and candidly, I, I think people should welcome that
39:26
because it I mean, imagine like you have you have AT&T,
39:29
Vodafone, Google, American Tower and of course Verizon.
39:33
Last week, you know, I talked about the dynamics where all
39:36
these companies make investments and and signing up strategic
39:40
partnerships just validates what we're doing.
39:42
And critically, Verizon to announce their the definitive
39:47
commercial agreement last week basically re underwrites the
39:51
entire thesis around ASDC's bubble because they've they've
39:54
obviously looked at Test results, they've been working
39:57
closely together. They also during.
40:01
Since what I guess may the end of May last year, I'm sure
40:04
they've continued to talk to Starlink and you know, I'm sure
40:08
Starlink. Representatives have.
40:09
Gone to Verizon, said hey, you guys should sign with us and
40:12
here's all the reasons. Look at all this cool stuff
40:13
we're doing. But even after all that, Verizon
40:17
still signed a different agreement with us and stuck with
40:19
us, which I think is a big, huge like validation for us.
40:24
So similarly, if the US takes a 5 to 10% stake in company after
40:33
you know the. The SDA.
40:35
DIU, any number of organizations who, you know, we have what, 6
40:40
military contracts with the US government after all the, that
40:43
testing and the results that have stemmed from that, for the
40:46
US government to say, hey, this, this company is critical.
40:48
We're going to take a stake. That would just be a mind
40:51
blowing like validation, I think for this company.
40:55
And so, yeah, it would be a big deal.
40:57
And I think, I think the market is underestimating that risk.
41:01
And I think it's, it's a decent probability.
41:04
And, and if we do, I mean, no one knows for sure, but if, but
41:08
I feel like the company is pretty confident and we
41:11
certainly are. If we do get a Golden Dome
41:15
award, then then I think basically all options are on the
41:18
table, right? Like if the company gets Golden
41:22
Dome or, and, or a few other big military contracts, then at that
41:29
point, you know, I, I, I would think the probability of a
41:33
potential awesome stake in the company become much, much
41:37
higher, if not perhaps announced at the same time.
41:41
Anyway, I've been rambling. I'm going to pause there.
41:43
Let me just take a look and see if there's any comments down
41:47
here. I bet alcohol.
41:50
I do not understand how that. Reduces the cost of capital.
41:52
They will buy it from the market right?
41:53
Or they take stage by paying premium to AST very less
41:57
solution. What I mean by reducing the cost
41:59
capital is that let's say the US government let's let's for shits
42:03
and giggles, let's give U.S. government a 10% discount.
42:06
Let's say they buy AST mobile shares at 80 bucks right And
42:10
then AST Space mobile. So we just we gave them a little
42:13
sweetheart deal. We sold them stock in a 10%
42:15
discount and then AST yeah, AST space mobile stock price I just
42:21
to make it simple, double s it double s in price to 180.
42:24
Well, in essence, your cost capital has gone down, right?
42:26
Because then instead of raising additional, additional equity
42:30
capital, if that's where you decide to go, instead of raising
42:33
at that 90, you're starting to raise equity capital at 180.
42:36
And so dilution is much, much less, right.
42:39
And the reason why that was accomplished is that the US
42:43
government has. Taken mistake in your.
42:45
Company and they've given you, you know, the ultimate
42:47
validation they've you know, they're, they're saying your
42:50
tech works, you're important to us, you're critical if you have
42:55
issues in the future, we're going to have we're we're
42:57
backing you a regulatory standpoint.
43:00
You know, perhaps you're going to get some favorable
43:02
treatments, whatever it is right, like, but you're because
43:05
all that is encapsulated into $180 stock price And let's say
43:10
the stock continues to stay at 180 and you're able to raise,
43:14
you know, you raise a few $100 million at 180.
43:17
That means your cost capital has been cut in half because the
43:21
stock price has doubled. So at least from equity
43:24
perspective, not that, but equity, your cost is capital is
43:27
being kind of half. So that's what what I mean by
43:29
that. Let's see, I get taking an
43:34
equity stake and. Almost entirely commercial
43:36
business, but if it is to get to billions from US contract,
43:38
doesn't that give them a lot of confidence and reduce cost
43:41
capital etcetera. Why there be a need for equity
43:43
stake on top of contracts? That's a very good point.
43:46
The US government could just give us a bunch of contracts and
43:50
the the stock price appreciates and everyone's happy.
43:54
We've been given a de facto Rd. of confidence.
43:57
However, to your question, not dark yet.
44:02
This administration works differently.
44:04
So they also are commercially interested.
44:08
And So what you've seen the Trump administration do is take
44:12
out what he sticks because they know that by doing so, those
44:17
stock prices of said companies are going to double or triple.
44:21
Then they're able to go to, you know, their constituents, the
44:25
US, you know, the US population say, hey, look, not only did we
44:30
give government money to these, these various companies through
44:35
contracts, but we actually were smart enough to take an equity
44:38
stake and we actually made back like a decent amount of that
44:42
money or, you know, and, and so it's, I think part of it stems
44:46
from just a political, it's a political win for politicians,
44:50
right? Like they, they were savvy
44:52
enough. Not only do we help foster this
44:54
industry, but we took an equity stake and we made a bunch of
44:56
money. I mean imagine like the.
45:00
Bureaucrats. Who gave Tesla the original
45:02
loans right? If they had taken they forced
45:05
them on must to give them 10% of the company.
45:07
That would have been like the best trade ever for the US
45:10
government, because that obviously would be worth way
45:13
more than the money that loans to Tesla.
45:17
And so I think that's where from a government's perspective, like
45:22
why they would take an equity stake.
45:24
Also the the optics of it that if you, the government is
45:28
willing to take equity risk on a company, that means that they
45:33
they see the potential is there and they're probably, you know,
45:37
implicitly going to do what what they can to protect that equity
45:41
stake, right. And so there's like some
45:43
additional handible, you know, meaty represent.
45:49
What that in? Terms of what that beings or
45:51
represents to the market, It's just a bit more than just a
45:55
government contract, right? And so it's like, oh, the
45:57
government has the end of the game and they actually think
46:00
there's upside here, which I think, you know, obviously
46:04
there's companies out there that get government contracts and
46:07
people are skeptical and they stay short the company.
46:09
But it's, it's like a totally different animal when the
46:13
government in this instance, you know, taking a strategic, not
46:17
taking a mistake because of a, a company's getting, you know, in
46:20
failure or something, but taking an equity state because they,
46:23
they believe in the company. The signaling, I think is just
46:26
much more powerful. In addition to, you know, the
46:29
financial contractor awards they're given.
46:33
Kelly Gromley, I think we have 8 government contracts now.
46:35
OK, I might be behind on this. Not 6, maybe it's 8.
46:40
Let's see, let's hear someone's claiming that the hackers or the
46:49
the potential hackers of the of during the UN meeting were
46:54
likely trainees, actors who are trying to disrupt USMNO
46:57
networks. Yeah, I mean, I don't personally
47:00
know. I wouldn't be surprised, but
47:03
yeah, it just underscores the importance of having.
47:08
Resiliency. And a failover network, which is
47:10
what HD Space Mobile is going to provide.
47:13
Let's see. $90.00 currently before the BB2.
47:18
Launch cadence seems pleasantly beyond what most people
47:21
envisioned. Where does this put stock price
47:24
guesstimates at once launch launches happen say mid 2026?
47:29
This is from Thomas Ashford. I don't know your guess is as
47:32
good as mine. I'm not really sure because I've
47:34
mentioned before, I think our, our esteemed friend Professor
47:40
Mack has has talked about as well.
47:43
I think the market with stock where it is now.
47:47
And over the last call it two or three weeks, there has been some
47:49
short covering. But it does seem that
47:52
professional money managers there, there does seem to be a
47:56
rewriting of sorts where people are beginning to recognize them.
47:59
And this is what Brian O'Connor Kook Priority Capital has talked
48:07
about and I've talked about as well is that we're, we're kind
48:10
of now at the point of the story where it's not a matter of if
48:13
it's going to happen or is a risk, but it's, it's more like
48:15
inevitability, right? Like it's going to happen like
48:19
the the constellations going to go up there and service is going
48:21
to happen. Now we might be wrong by a few
48:24
months or perhaps even a few quarters because this stuff is
48:27
really hard, but it's going to happen.
48:28
And so I think the market is starting to price the fact that
48:32
this is going to happen. The opportunity is huge.
48:34
And so once that's kind of the base case, then how does the
48:39
market discount that, right? Like is a market for the
48:43
skeptics and shorts, They're like, hey, you should be looking
48:45
at the last 12 months financials, the the historic
48:48
financials basically say like this company hasn't generated
48:51
anything. But as Ryan O'Connor famously
48:54
pointed out, like when they were building Alaska pipeline, no one
48:58
was evaluating, evaluating it off of the existing financial
49:03
capacity, which was 0, Like they were valuing it off of future
49:06
cash flows, right? And so it's not as if people
49:09
built, they built the pipeline and then the day they turned on
49:12
the oil, that was like, hey, OK, OK, now we can value the company
49:15
because it's, it's, it's, it's carrying oil now.
49:20
And so in the same, in same regards for AST, it's, the
49:25
question is like, are people going to value the company and
49:28
its potential? Are they discounting based off
49:30
of 2026, 2020, 7/20/28? And you know when you get to
49:36
those out years, the numbers become really massive even if
49:39
you haircut them significantly, right?
49:41
Like we're talking about minimal penetration rates into
49:45
subscriber bases of 50 or more M and OS.
49:48
And so similarly for SpaceX, when you looked at the
49:54
development of the, the launch capacity or launch vehicles and
49:59
then of course, Starlink, it's not as if people were pricing or
50:02
valuing SpaceX off of what they were doing at that point in time
50:06
when the company was worth, you know, ten billion, 20 billion,
50:08
4050, a hundred. They were evaluated based off of
50:12
the potential where they would eventually get to which it took
50:15
much longer than people had expected and for the company
50:18
expected. I mean, SpaceX famously when
50:22
Elon Musk had talked about going to Mars, those initial slides I
50:25
believe showed that that Starship was going to be landing
50:33
on Mars sometime in 2022. Well, guess what?
50:35
We're in 2025 and we're still quite a long ways away from from
50:39
the that becoming a reality. That said, you know, SpaceX is
50:44
now what, worth close to $500 billion.
50:48
And you know, anyone, the skeptics will say, well, if you
50:51
value it based off of current year revenues and, you know,
50:55
probability, it doesn't make any sense.
50:56
But yeah, yeah, sure. Like no one's, no one is valuing
51:00
Starlink or SpaceX based off of this year's financials.
51:04
They're they're basing off of what the potential the company
51:07
can do in two to three years, right?
51:10
And so The funny thing about like rates, an interesting
51:14
environment where rates are really low and the discount rate
51:17
is low as a result. And perhaps there's more
51:20
liquidities swashing around the market and people are becoming
51:23
more enthusiastic about the prospects of any number of
51:28
sectors they start to discount further out.
51:31
Like, OK, I'm going to instead look at 2026 or 2027.
51:34
I'm going to start looking at 2028 numbers.
51:37
And so, yeah, it's a good question.
51:39
I'm not really sure. I mean, I think I, I do think we
51:43
have the ability to get. To.
51:47
You know, north of 100 actually relatively sooner because I
51:52
think going back to summit around the launch campaign, you
51:56
know, now we're going to be launching satellites every wait,
52:00
once that starts, it'll be 1A a payload, everyone to 1 1/2 or
52:05
sorry, 1 1/2 months on average. And so there's going to be
52:09
something tangible for investors to get their arms around.
52:11
And, and obviously once those satellites start opening up and
52:15
and people start underwriting the economics for each
52:17
satellite, then I think you're going to see this continued
52:20
unlocking of valuation. What that means.
52:23
And I mean, God, like if we get Golden Dome or some of these
52:26
other military contracts, then that opens up a whole, a whole
52:30
like a true another segment. You know, we have 3 verticals,
52:33
commercial, the commercial business with M and OS, the
52:36
government business with first responder networks and then of
52:38
course defense. But you know, if you were to get
52:42
a few $100 million or whatever it is from for Golden Dome,
52:46
which then can grow into much bigger numbers, what does that
52:48
mean? And how do you value, value that
52:50
piece of business? And and so let me just take a
52:55
look here. Our current market cap is 33
53:00
billion and you know perhaps I think maybe the market was
53:03
discounting or or rewriting the valuation partially because of
53:07
as we all know Legato that that got you know.
53:12
Bankruptcy approval. Not long ago, this is just a few
53:15
weeks ago. And, and whether you value
53:17
Legato at 15 or $20 billion, you know, depends on obviously the
53:23
economics they're able to extract from that spectrum,
53:25
which I think is going to be very high.
53:27
And so if you had a residual from that, if you take out that
53:30
piece of what that spectrum was worth commercially deployed,
53:35
then you've got what 1015 billion of equity left that's
53:40
built into AC space mobile stock price.
53:42
Like how big is a golden Dome business?
53:45
Is that if that generates a few $100 million a year, what is
53:49
that worth or if we truly are able to provide a secondary
53:54
backup to GPS for P&T services like that in of itself is a few
53:58
$100 million a year. And then if you're able to
54:02
generate a few billion dollars a year and subscriber revenues
54:05
which are highly recurring, you know from mobile subscribers and
54:09
have very high margins because we don't we don't have loaded
54:12
costs like customer support service acquisition cost.
54:15
We don't have any of these things or I'm no partner going
54:17
to bear all that. So what is that worth?
54:19
And so I think it's a long way to answer to say, yeah, the
54:24
stock I did 2026, I could easily see a double from here, right?
54:28
Could it or possibly even higher or maybe it will be a little bit
54:31
higher from here. But it's hard, it's hard to kind
54:36
of triangulate because I think it really depends on how quickly
54:39
the market understands the opportunity.
54:41
And you know, that said, we've been very fortunate that the
54:45
market is starting to understand and starting, it's starting to
54:48
get priced in as they were to say.
54:51
It's some people say, some folks out there don't they think
54:55
everything's priced in. But in reality, I I think that's
54:59
too simplistic my answer. But anyway, yeah, that's that's
55:03
that's my. That's my answer.
55:08
Let's see here, just looking through some of these questions.
55:16
Interesting. Somebody Dylan here asked Grog,
55:20
what do you estimate the odds of the US taking a passive stake in
55:23
Asds to be? This is what Rock said based on
55:26
current partnerships, 8 of the DODSDADIU and precedents like US
55:31
stakes and Intel or MP materials.
55:33
Passive stake in ASD is plausible for street reasons
55:36
like network resiliency. I agree with that.
55:38
However, no confirmed plans exist.
55:40
I'd estimate the odds at 10 to 20% with high uncertainty.
55:44
High uncertainty OK so yeah I think I, I think I, I, I would
55:48
error on higher probably I'd put that more 20% and depending on
55:53
how some of these contracts unfold that probably goes even
55:56
higher. But it is kind of cool to see
55:59
that Grok agrees to some extent. So anyway, that's kind of it.
56:06
Oh, I see some people who I've never seen before asking to come
56:09
up, so I. Will bring up a few people.
56:14
And let's see what they have to say.
56:17
Let's bring up Jack Capital here.
56:21
Hello, Jack, are you there? Here.
56:24
I'm here. Jack Capital.
56:29
Jack, you still with us? Can you hear me?
56:31
Yeah, I can hear you. Hello.
56:31
OK. I was curious.
56:33
What's I've been a long time follower of your page and you
56:37
made me a bunch of money. But anyway, thank you for that.
56:40
But what is your sort of ultra long term like?
56:44
What do you think this company becomes like your super long
56:48
term thesis? Is this is this going to be sort
56:51
of an equal in size? Not asking for specifics, but
56:54
are you seeing as an equal in size as SpaceX Starlink or just
56:58
here it's like 10 year, 20 year what you see for this company?
57:01
Yeah, I I think over the. Long run, asti think the key
57:06
thing for people to understand is this company has the
57:08
potential to be the largest wireless carrier in the world
57:12
with, you know, it with over a billion subscribers.
57:16
I mean, that's the opportunity, right?
57:17
And So what is that worth? It could be worth 10X.
57:22
You know, the market cap it is today, which will put it at 300,
57:25
$20 billion, right or it could be more than that.
57:28
And So what are people willing to pay for that?
57:31
And so that's what I think the long term potential is.
57:33
Now does it take 10 years to get there, 15 years?
57:38
I'm not sure. I'm not sure how long that will
57:40
take, but I think that's what the opportunity is.
57:42
And and so for a company like this where you have an installed
57:48
base of mobile phones that can be lit up and service be, you
57:52
know, provided through M&O partnerships of course to
57:56
subscribers, whether that's an ongoing basis or one off basis.
58:01
Yeah, the potential is huge. I don't think that there's been
58:05
any other businesses quite like it, I think, I think Piranha.
58:10
Who's down? Below has talked about Netflix
58:13
growing to a few 100 million subscribers, everyone paying
58:16
$1415.00 a month. Perhaps that's kind of a similar
58:20
example. But I think that's the
58:21
opportunity where this company has so much white space and
58:26
runway. And it's not just, you know, for
58:28
the regular observer, they they just think about consumer
58:32
applications that they don't think about defense or
58:35
government. And so I mean, just look at
58:36
Netflix, the market cap is $518 billion.
58:41
So, so yeah, I think, I think those are the types of numbers
58:45
that eventually we can, you know, this company could get to
58:49
that's how I think about long term got it, got.
58:53
It thanks for that and and just. One last question, just
58:55
regarding this potential U.S. government stake, Do you think
58:58
that? So let's just make an assumption
59:00
that if US does acquire that 5 to 10% stake that we'll be
59:04
talking about, does that materially affect, and this is
59:08
just I guess very crazy thinking, but does that make
59:11
materially affect acquisition, acquisition odds from something
59:16
like an apple etcetera if they see the US government acquiring
59:20
like taking a little stake? And then just what your thoughts
59:23
on that it? Depends.
59:26
If the acquirer is friendly to the US and the US is OK with it,
59:29
then I don't think that would impact it.
59:31
But then I, I think, I think a CS very unique in that it does
59:38
have a high amount of strategic value, but the value is also
59:42
remaining neutral. What I mean by that is if Apple
59:46
requires, then perhaps like Google will feel threatened and
59:49
maybe they won't play as nice. And that that's why, for
59:52
example, the company has its dual class ownership where a
59:56
bell controls the company. They did that to keep the
1:00:00
possibility of some interloper buying shares of the company
1:00:03
enforcing. Whether it's a hedge fund or
1:00:06
maybe another corporation, like forcing the company into a sale.
1:00:10
But I think for a company like Apple, yeah, I, you know, I
1:00:15
think the US government would probably view them positively
1:00:18
and allow that to go through. But I think, you know, a foreign
1:00:21
entity if, if you had desperations that perhaps a
1:00:24
foreign buyer might be able to buy the company, that would
1:00:27
certainly be off the table if the US took a stake.
1:00:29
But but I do think the highest value in use case for the
1:00:34
company is not to be owned by Google or Facebook or sorry,
1:00:38
Meta or Amazon or Apple. I think it's to remain
1:00:42
independent because the nature of what the company is doing,
1:00:45
which is serving as many as many M and OS as possible and as many
1:00:50
companies like you know, Microsoft, Amazon, I mean, all
1:00:54
these companies need connectivity.
1:00:57
I think remaining neutral was going to be a partner.
1:00:59
Now that doesn't preclude them from taking strategic stakes,
1:01:02
which is what they've done in the past, right?
1:01:04
American tower, Google, Verizon, Vodafone, AT&T of all taken
1:01:10
investment stakes, Rakuten. And and that's OK as long as
1:01:13
there's no majority owner or or someone who has undue influence.
1:01:17
And and so that's why I've always, I've always Pooh poohed
1:01:21
the idea of the company ever selling because the the real
1:01:23
value is remaining independent and serving money.
1:01:27
Yeah. Got it, Got it.
1:01:29
Thanks for. Thanks for.
1:01:30
That that's my that's. My final question, Thanks again.
1:01:33
Yeah. Thanks for coming up.
1:01:35
You see, there's Mateo Jones. I'm going to bring them up.
1:01:47
OK, let's see. Maybe it's not working?
1:01:53
All right, Well, I think they. Are not going to come up.
1:01:57
They're having connection issues, but actually I'm not
1:02:00
looking the clock it's 217. I actually have to to hop soon.
1:02:05
We got to go pick up the kids. There's no school today in New
1:02:08
York, so there's various camps going on.
1:02:09
But but yeah, thanks everyone for joining.
1:02:12
I I hope this was helpful and spurred some, you know, thought
1:02:17
for, for everyone, you know, something to think about, which
1:02:19
is the fact that I do think the company itself is, is highly
1:02:23
strategic and important to network resiliency,
1:02:27
communications, both growth on the consumer side, but
1:02:30
government and military side. And so I think as we.
1:02:36
Follow the. Development and focus of U.S.
1:02:40
government on space as an important sector.
1:02:44
I, I do think the possibility and probability or probability
1:02:49
of, of the US taking stakes and again that just that that
1:02:52
doesn't necessarily just mean equity.
1:02:54
It could also be loans, you know, quasi government loans,
1:02:58
whatever it is. But I do think perhaps we should
1:03:03
be surprised like when some of these golden Dome contracts
1:03:06
awards go out. And again, this this is this is
1:03:11
partially to secure US interest as well.
1:03:13
I mean, if you're, if you're going to dole out a large award
1:03:16
to a company that still is pre revenue and and is on cusp of
1:03:21
commercialization, but you want to make sure that they're going
1:03:23
to make it and you have their complete attention to focus.
1:03:27
You know, not only do you dole out a big award, but I think
1:03:29
perhaps you take a stake in the company as well.
1:03:31
And so, yeah, we'll see in the coming weeks.
1:03:35
I do, you know, unfortunately government shutdown, I think
1:03:38
it's delayed awards, but we should be learning about some of
1:03:42
these awards, whether it's related to Golden Dome or some
1:03:45
of these other contracts, we should start seeing those in the
1:03:48
coming weeks and months. And yeah, it's something to to
1:03:52
think about and I, I bet we will see U.S. government take
1:03:58
additional stakes and other sectors.
1:04:00
And so as an investment thing, I think it's something to be aware
1:04:03
of. And you know, whether you're
1:04:05
speculating on some companies that seem like they, they should
1:04:10
be critical to US interests and perhaps, you know, that might be
1:04:13
good candidates. You know, that that's an
1:04:15
emerging theme that I think probably everybody is spending
1:04:19
extra time and trying to think through the next, the next
1:04:23
companies that might get around investment and what 2nd and 3rd
1:04:25
order effects are. I mean, you name it.
1:04:28
But anyway, but yeah, I hope this was helpful and we'll,
1:04:32
we'll talk again soon. I'm sure there's going to be
1:04:34
more news, which I expect. You know, I've mentioned before
1:04:39
we there's some additional commercial agreements that could
1:04:42
come to fruition. I think Bell Canada is probably
1:04:45
on the top of the list, Saudi Telecom, a few others.
1:04:48
But yeah, any day now, which you know, it's an exciting time to
1:04:52
be an investor. Anyway, I'll cut it there and
1:04:55
we'll we'll do this again. Maybe, maybe there'll be some
1:04:58
news today, tomorrow, this week and we'll have to run another
1:05:01
space. But thanks again, everyone
1:05:03
joining I hope was helpful. And until next time, take care.
1:05:09
Thanks for listening to the AST. Space Mobile Podcast If you
1:05:13
enjoyed this episode and you'd like to help support the
1:05:16
podcast, please share it with others, post about it on social
1:05:19
media, or leave a rating and review.
1:05:22
To catch all the latest news about AST Space Mobile, make
1:05:25
sure to subscribe. Thanks again and I'll see you
1:05:28
next time. We're doing something very, very
1:05:34
big. An activity technology we can
1:05:36
really affect billion lives ASP space mobile is the only company
1:05:41
that has proven technology to deliver cellular broadband
1:05:44
connectivity directly from space to the everyday smartphone
1:05:49
people will just basically turn their.
1:05:50
Phone. And be Syndex regardless of
1:05:53
where you are. We don't want the user even to
1:05:55
know that it's connected by satellite.
1:05:58
Our role is to bring this into reality, always in partnership
1:06:02
with the MMO.