More on revenue decline and recovery:
81% Revenue Collapse In One Year: The Regulatory Story Hidden In Turtlemint’s DRHP - Inventiva 81% Revenue Collapse In One Year: The Regulatory Story Hidden In Turtlemint's DRHP - Inventiva
1 Like
Yes. Businesses where the regulatory risk is the primary risk deserve a deeper look.
For instance, although there is news that formalisation is planned, digital gold is one more example.
IPO ESDS, interesting findings: I search in google - SharonAI fraud
Response on google/ai: The core fraud allegations surrounding SharonAI Holdings Inc. (NASDAQ: SHAZ) stem from an activist short-seller report published by Bleecker Street Research, which accused the company of running a “neocloud” built on phantom contracts, self-dealing, and questionable financing.While SharonAI has vehemently rejected these fraud allegations, the short-seller report and subsequent scrutiny highlighted several major red flags that investors and analysts have questioned:1. The Legitimacy of Mega-ContractsThe ESDS Controversy: SharonAI announced a massive $1.26 billion, five-year contract with India-based cloud provider ESDS Software Solutions. Critics noted that ESDS only generates about $40 million in annual revenue, making a $250 million-per-year commitment to SharonAI appear completely unaffordable and unrealistic.Lack of Independent Confirmation: Activists pointed out that the target companies (such as Canva and ESDS) did not initially put out independent statements confirming the details or scale of these multi-billion-dollar deals.2. Misleading NVIDIA Relationship DisclosuresIn its early SEC 10-K filings, SharonAI explicitly described NVIDIA as a "strategic shareholder."Shortly after, the company had to file an amended 8-K correction with the SEC admitting that NVIDIA holds no equity in SharonAI. While they do have a hardware deployment collaboration, the inflation of the partnership drew heavy criticism.3. Management’s Past Track RecordCEO Background: Co-founder and CEO James Manning previously led Mawson Infrastructure Group, a Bitcoin mining company that lost over 90% of its share value under his leadership.Active Lawsuits: The short report highlighted that Manning was sued by his former company, Mawson, for allegedly directing over $11 million to a logistics company he personally controlled without disclosing his conflict of interest to the board.Insiders Selling to Insiders: Critics alleged that the foundational assets used to spin up SharonAI were essentially sales made by insiders to themselves to generate artificial valuation.4. Questionable Financial BackersThe company’s primary financial lender, USD.AI, was exposed as an entity created by the team behind a previously collapsed NFT startup, raising eyebrows regarding the stability of SharonAI’s debt capital.Current Status (August 2026)Despite the severe allegations that caused early stock volatility, SharonAI has spent mid-2026 attempting to prove its legitimacy through verifiable operations. In June 2026, they secured a massive $1.6 billion strategic financing round, and in late August 2026, they announced successful customer acceptance of their first phase AI Cloud deployment. This deployment reportedly triggered the release of cash security out of escrow, which the company is using to push back against the “phantom contract” narrative.
Disclaimer: No interest in IPO. Not qualified nor SEBI registered.
9 Likes
I’ve been looking deeper into ESDS, particularly the much-publicised 8,208 NVIDIA B300 GPU / $1.25 billion Sharon AI deal.
One important point seems to be getting missed in a lot of IPO discussions:
The $1.25 billion is not a $1.25 billion revenue contract received by ESDS. ESDS is the customer purchasing/committing to GPU compute capacity from Sharon AI.
That makes the key questions very different:
• How much of the 8,208 GPU capacity is already backed by signed downstream customers?
• What is ESDS’s minimum take-or-pay commitment?
• What utilisation is required to break even?
• What revenue/EBITDA can ESDS generate at 60%, 70% and 80% utilisation?
• What exactly is ESDS’s exposure under the reported ~$140m LC/bank-guarantee arrangement?
I attended/listened to the investor interaction and unfortunately didn’t get clear answers on these economics.
I like the underlying cloud/AI opportunity and ESDS is clearly growing strongly. But at ₹429 + ~₹330–350 GMP, the market is effectively valuing it around ₹750–780/share before listing.
At that valuation, I think understanding the GPU economics is critical.
Would be interested if anyone has found disclosures showing committed customers/revenue against these 8,208 GPUs. That would materially change the analysis.
5 Likes
On ESDS IPO
1 Like