I sit and I wonder, what other (recently mentioned)

corporations are these guys working with 🤔.

I know they are not allowed to spill the beans on it yet.

Then I wonder if they have to wait till after the merger to tell us?

Seems likley that’s the case.

Perhaps these new players are some pretty big fish that want to see a full stack in place before publicaly endorsing and partnering?

Seems a reasonable assumption to me.

I think this Vote is MUCH bigger than we may think.

It’s a big deal.

Also, and I really need to think this through and create a 1 paragraph phase that gets the point across but,

Basically, it’s so important to understand, you’re not losing anything, you are instead gaining a position in two additional projects while keeping your current position in SNET.

Example - As FET rises, I’m sure some here get a bit of FOMO and wish they would have gotten involved with them too.

Well, guess what, if this passes, you’ll own a stake in that without having to make the hard decisions of trading out and chasing markets.


This is all food for thought.

I hope in the coming days, and after some initial shock wears off, you’ll consider the factors mentioned above.

And remember, success of this project is what takes all of us to the outer limits of success, for whatever your reason is for being here.

An Alliance like this may be the perfect way to create that future.

It certainly increases the chances of success exponentially.

Well articulated and curated! This is one of the most intelligent and reasonable pieces I have read on this new frontier called merger! As I said somewhere before, no snet holder knows SNET more than the CEO, this decision must have been made in the overall best interest of the project (snet) and the AI world. So instead of people just complaining and saying and saying they will vote no, why not sit back and do some research? This might be the best thing that has ever happened to SNET and of course, your bag! ASI can x50 easily when revolutionary products are delivered and big players come onboard. These guys (CEOs) know what holders don't know and see what holders can't see. I can assure you holders, the CEOs know what they are doing.

I think SNET team is more capable after this deal… so it’s net net a good deal.

Anytime a bad deal is struck you are losing. A bad deal (in this case) means that instead of having what you should have in the future, it will instead be less than half of what it should rightly be. All because we are all pretending that the ratios are "locked" in stone. They are not, they never are. EVERYTHING is negotiable... and it is not a take it or leave it choice. That's just an imaginary limitation. Reject that framing. Fix the ratio to be fair, or watch the "locked" deal burn. When it becomes clear that a deal rejection is certain, "locked" ratios will suddenly come back on the table for negotiation

I hear you, I however think there is much we don’t know about the negotiations that took place. I assume that SNET leadership did negotiate, strongly on all of our behalf, and with knowledge of the points you and many others have brought up, including valuations and ratios. At at any point, they could have decided that the terms were not acceptable and politely walked away. They instead, based on all public and private knowledge, have made the decisions that this is still in the best interests of all of us and proposed the merger to us. I am not personally experienced in banking and financial situations such as these, so must defer to experts. Speaking of experts, they have experienced leadership on the team, with a history in finance and dealing with these types of matters. Take for example Janet Adams and her background in finance. Here is some detail on her background if you were not yet aware. Janet Adams is the COO of SingularityNET, a decentralized platform for artificial intelligence (AI) services. She has a background in banking and finance, having served as the Head of Strategic Projects and Performance for SME at TSB Bank and Global Head of Conduct for HSBC. Adams has a Master of Science in Artificial Intelligence from the University of Essex and a Bachelor of Science in Geology from the University of Greenwich. *Credit Grok for this* I would also assume they have consulted with others who are expert in these matters. All these things are what give me confidence they have considered the points you and many others have brought up. It is very likely that the exact details of the negotiations are kept private. I do know that is generally the case as confidential data (think ongoing but not yet disclosed partnerships) is usually shared between all parties and NDAs signed to protect all parties as well. Standard practice. This does indeed require a bit of faith, and trust, but I have not been let down at all in the 6 plus years of this projects existence. I will rely on all of that to guide my decision.

correct

It’s corporate fomo