OpenAI, Stripe, Kalshi & Investing Before the IPO

Summary

Brew Markets – July 17, 2026

Episode: OpenAI, Stripe, Kalshi & Investing Before the IPO
Host: Ann Berry
Guest: Mike Dinsdale, CEO of Power Law Corp.

---

Episode Overview

This episode explores the increasingly visible but largely inaccessible world of late-stage private tech companies and how retail investors can (or cannot) take part before IPOs. Ann Berry sits down with Mike Dinsdale, CEO of Power Law Corp, a closed-end fund that aims to give everyday investors access to high-profile private companies like OpenAI, Stripe, Kalshi, and (formerly) SpaceX. The conversation moves from the mechanics and challenges of their investment structure, implications for retail investors, the shifting public/private dynamics in tech, the realities of NAV vs. share price, and candid insights on what’s next for private tech investing.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Power Law’s Model: Democratizing Access to Private Tech

• Structure & Purpose:
  • Power Law is a closed-end fund trading on NASDAQ (ticker: PWRL), giving retail investors exposure to a concentrated portfolio of major private tech firms.
  • The fund holds 15 highly-vetted, high-growth tech companies and enables access that’s typically available only to VCs or accredited investors.

  “The goal was to build a portfolio of the best of the best, 15 names in tech and then provide access to all.” — Mike Dinsdale (02:43)

• Motivation:
  • Acknowledges the $25 trillion in U.S. retirement accounts and aims to open these up to value creation in private markets.
  • Cites inefficiencies in the traditional venture model, such as extended fund lifespans and lack of liquidity for early investors.

---

2. Power Law’s Portfolio and IPO Exits

• Handling Public Company Transitions:
  • Once a private holding (like SpaceX) goes public, Power Law plans to gradually sell down its position and redeploy capital into new private names.
  • OpenAI is the next likely candidate for this strategy, with its IPO eyed for 2027.

  “Our fund’s value comes from giving access to privates. And so once we’re in a world where we’re holding public equities, that value starts to disappear.” — Mike Dinsdale (05:59)

• Managing Timing and Returns:
  • Power Law will evaluate when and at what price to sell its now-public shares, comparing potential gains vs. reallocating into higher-growth privates.
  • Example: Entered SpaceX at a $400B valuation, now at substantial gain despite recent post-IPO dip.

---

3. Taxation and Distributions for Investors

• RIC Structure:
  • Power Law operates as a Registered Investment Company (RIC), meaning single-layer taxation and required distribution of 90% of realized gains to shareholders (as cash or shares).

  “For a lot of our foreign shareholders, that’s not the case because they’re exempt from U.S. tax... that’s just part of the closed end fund and being in compliance with RIC tax status.” — Mike Dinsdale (07:29)

---

4. Portfolio Highlights & Company-Specific Insights

• OpenAI:
  • 8% of the portfolio; Dinsdale views it as a multitrillion dollar opportunity but expects IPO in 2027, not sooner.
• Stripe:
  • ~4% allocation; discussed potential Stripe/Advent bid to take PayPal private. Stripe viewed as already operating like a public company, unlikely to IPO soon.

  “Stripe, you know, could have been a public company 15 years ago. And it’s interesting that it continues to be private... we want to give exposure to those names.” — Mike Dinsdale (09:35)

• Kalshi:
  • 6% stake; strong returns so far, but regulatory landscape for prediction markets is a key consideration.
• New Additions (Prometheus Industries & SHIELD):
  • Both were direct investments (primarily), with a growing focus on space, defense, robotics as new themes for additional funds.

---

5. Deal Sourcing & Advantages

• Origin of Investments:
  • Mix of 50% direct/primary and 50% secondary/indirect investment.
  • Power Law leverages its “secondary” roots: 900 such deals in 16 years, comfortable purchasing from founders, employees, or GP liquidity needs.

  “We’re comfortable doing a lot of different structures... gives us an advantage in terms of building positions in between rounds.” — Mike Dinsdale (19:09)

---

6. Valuation, Transparency, and the NAV Disconnect

• NAV vs. Market Price:
  • As of June 30, NAV per share was $16+, but the stock trades under $12—a steep discount.
  • Low trading volume, lack of awareness, and recent high-profile tech selloffs contribute.

  “Our share price is going to end up... trading at NAV. And then I think the premium develops as we just unlock a lot of demand against very limited supply.” — Mike Dinsdale (21:35 & 24:27)

• Valuation Practices:
  • Uses independent firms and multiple approaches (last round, comps, internal data). But admits lag and opacity are inherent in private markets.

  “I’ve almost never seen a company that’s. Once I gain access to information that it’s better, it’s always worse. Always.” — Mike Dinsdale (29:10)

---

7. Challenges for Retail Investors

• Due Diligence:
  • Hard for retail to independently assess funds holding private companies: they lack disclosures, analyst coverage, and transparency.
  • Dinsdale urges retail to “right-size” allocations and understand these investments carry risk.

  “Retail investors are really going to have to trust your nav. Right? Because it’s very hard... to do independent due diligence on privately held companies.” — Ann Berry (26:44)

---

8. Calls for Greater Transparency in Tech Unicorns

• Regulatory Needs:
  • Supports more disclosures from large private companies as their scale and retail interest grow.

  “I think yes. And I think when we’re seeing all of the press around SPVs... it is a little bit of the wild west in terms of what the fee structure is, stack up ownership.” — Mike Dinsdale (28:05)

---

9. Looking Forward: Power Law’s Wishlist and Sector Focus

• Future Investments:
  • Top wish-list companies: Applied Intuition (not yet in portfolio), Anduril (defense tech).
  • Sees the next decade as dominated by space, AI, robotics, and defense. New sector-focused funds expected.

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On staying private vs. going public:

  “There needs to be incentives for these big mega privates to go public... They don’t need access to capital. We have the emergence of mega funds... The advantage to being private isn’t as big as it is today.” — Mike Dinsdale (11:22)

• On the accuracy of private valuations:

  “Once I gain access to information that it’s better, it’s always worse. Always. There’s never been, ever been an investment I’ve looked at where I get access to information. Finally I go, oh wow, this is so much better than I thought.” — Mike Dinsdale (29:10)

• On retail due diligence:

  “It’s an incredibly difficult one because we can’t obviously disclose anything that’s non public information and there’s so many restrictions that we have placed on us in terms of just any communication around our portfolio companies.” — Mike Dinsdale (26:44)

• On fundraising shifts:

  “I think there’s a component with those companies specifically that they were tapping out the capital that was available to them on the private side. So I think they have to go across into the public domain. And that’s what we’re seeing with those three specifically. But I’m not so sure that’s going deeper into the stack or that’s a general trend.” — Mike Dinsdale (14:17)

---

Timestamps for Key Segments

• Power Law’s Structure and Purpose – [02:35–03:34]
• Handling Public Portfolio Companies (SpaceX, OpenAI) – [03:34–05:25]
• Capital Gains and Tax Mechanics – [07:18–08:07]
• Portfolio Highlights (OpenAI, Stripe, Kalshi, New Additions) – [08:07–10:34], [15:21–18:55]
• Deal Sourcing Approach – [19:04–20:22]
• The NAV vs. Share Price Disconnect – [20:22–24:27]
• Retail Due Diligence and Transparency Challenges – [26:04–26:44]
• Transparency in Late-Stage Private Companies – [27:41–29:30]
• Power Law’s Wishlist for Future Investments – [29:30–30:48]

---

Final Thoughts

Mike Dinsdale offered a rare, candid insider view on how Power Law tries to bridge the world of private tech's value creation and retail access. The episode is an essential listen for anyone curious about the hardest-to-own companies—and the practical, regulatory, and valuation landmines still in the way for everyone but VCs and the ultra-wealthy.

Closing words:

“Clearly there’s wealth creation happening and value creation happening on the private side and we give access to that. But it all comes down to the right sized allocation and risk profile of an individual shareholder.” — Mike Dinsdale (26:44)

---

For more episodes and daily trend analysis, follow Brew Markets.

Transcript

[Aflac Representative]

Many employees can't afford a hefty medical bill that pops up out of the blue, but it happens. And employees who are financially stressed are understandably more likely to be distracted at work, costing their employers greatly in lost productivity. Luckily, Aflac plans help with out of pocket expenses not covered by health insurance and can be offered at no direct cost to businesses. Learn [e-mail] BrewMarkets that's aflac.com BrewMarkets

[Ann Berry]

for Friday, July 17th. It's Brew Markets Daily and I'm Ann Berry. Private tech companies OpenAI, Kalshi, Stripe and until recently SpaceX, all with high visibility, mass appeal, but limited access when it comes to the chance to invest in them. Stoking a long standing debate over whether retail investors are perhaps inevitably left holding the bag when these kinds of companies finally go public. And there's an enthusiastic rush by everyday traders to get in at last. So this can yield profits to long term venture capital investors who go in years or even decades earlier, but can leave public shareholders bearing the risk like that we've just seen come to life with SpaceX, whose stock price this week hit a level below its $135 debut a mere month after its IPO. While the mission of giving public market investors access to private venture backed companies has been pursued by multiple fund managers from Cathie Wood's Ark Invest to now PowerLaw Corp. PowerLaw listed on the NASDAQ recently, just in May ticker PWRL and holds positions in many of those high profile tech names from OpenAI to Canva perplexity to Jeff Bezos's Prometheus Industries. Well, we've been watching this group of publicly traded funds for a while and have been keeping ready a long list of questions on how these actually work. So we were delighted to welcome to today's show Power Law's CEO Mike Dinsdale for a very candid conversation on what happens at Power Law when one of its private portfolio companies goes public. Just happened with its position in SpaceX. How power law goes about sourcing deals, the challenges of valuing private companies in pretty much any scenario, but especially for retail investors who really want to do their own homework on the underlying portfolios of these funds plus what it is that drives the share price of PowerLaw in this volatile, evolving market. Well, Mike, CEO of PowerLaw was unafraid to answer a barrage of questions, so stay with us for a fun one for this summer Friday. In your own words, just describe, if you don't mind, what it is that Power Law does. It's A pretty unusual structure.

[Mike Dinsdale]

Yeah. So Power Law is actually a fund that's trading on NASDAQ under the ticker pwrl. Our firm is called Power Law Capital Group. And so the thesis behind Power Law, or the first flagship fund, and the goal that was to build a portfolio of the best of the best, 15 names in tech and then provide access to all. And as we thought about the venture ecosystem and what we wanted to do next in terms of raising traditional venture, we looked at the $3 trillion it's invested in venture and the issues that had been developing over time in terms of just elongation of funds, no capital return. And then there's a big trend happening around giving access to privates. And there's $25 trillion in U.S. retirement accounts. And we wanted to take to market a product that focused on both sides of that ecosystem, giving access to privates, solving the structural problems that have been developing in Ven, and then opening up access to all around the world to the value creation that's been happening with private companies. And that's what we're all about.

[Ann Berry]

So you're a closed end fund. Just to clarify for folks how you're structured, I want to talk about your portfolio because while your pedigree has been in investing in private companies, you've actually now got one significant public name in there. So I have in front of me, I'm on your investor relations page and you list of course, as regulators require you to do your portfolio every quarter. So this is as of 6:30 and as of 6:30, SpaceX was 19.4% of your portfolio. Now just given the IPO. Walk us through, if you don't mind, Mike. The rationale for someone to invest in Power Law versus just going and buying that stock themselves directly.

[Mike Dinsdale]

Yeah, sure. So there's one, one clarification. We're actually mandated by the SEC to report our NAV on a monthly basis. So we're the first fund that's actually doing that on a quarterly basis. We of course report, you know, the same as other public funds in terms of the NAV of our as of June 30, it's actually 700 million in NAV and that's on a cost basis of 400 million, which we closed in July of 2025. So in under a year we've had great performance in the fund in terms of the concentration in SpaceX. So now that SpaceX is public, you know, our value as a fund is to give access to privates. And so as that lockup comes off on SpaceX, we'll sell down that position over time as makes sense, and then redeploy that capital into the next, the next group of private companies or into existing names. All along the same theme with our flagship fund, which is best of the best concentration in 15 material positions. So as companies go public, OpenAI is our second largest position and as OpenAI goes public, it'll be the same thing that our value is around access to privates. So we'll sell down that position, reinvest in either a new name, or continue to build positions in existing names in our portfolio.

[Ann Berry]

It's interesting to hear you be so open about that, Mike, because when Space X went public, and this was a little bit people talking in their own book, those who are allowed to talk about their strategy, a lot of folks who I thought of almost as SpaceX surrogates went out onto the media and said they don't plan to sell. Now, this particular, as we record right now, SpaceX's share price has hit a level that's actually below the IPO share price of 135 bucks. So when you think about the decision to sell down that Space X position over time, how are you thinking about the right price at which to do that? How are you assessing that exit opportunity?

[Mike Dinsdale]

Yeah, I mean, it's an interesting one because I think SpaceX is going to be and continue to be a great asset to own. Yeah, I think the unlock related to Starlink and obviously as we start to think about the space economy, it is a one of one asset. It's just that our fund's value comes from giving access to privates. And so once we're in a world where we're holding public equities, that value starts to disappear. Because of course you can build a portfolio of those names in the public domain and so the value goes away in terms of what we bring to our shareholders. And so we would sell it down in terms of what price? I mean, that's something we'll evaluate as we get to a point where we can in fact start to sell down that position. So I can't really answer that directly at this point. We'll have to see what makes sense in terms of the portfolio. I will say that when we look at some names, because we can also sell on the private side if we don't think that we're going to get the same type of return over the same time frame. So are we going to get a 5X in SpaceX over the next two years or three years? Probably not. So it would still make sense to sell down the position even at today's price, to redeploy that into new names where we think we can get a better return.

[Ann Berry]

And so if you don't mind, could you talk about the entry price at which you did come into SpaceX? When did you make that investment, Mike? What's the basis for the position that's held in this particular fund?

[Mike Dinsdale]

Yeah, we were in around 400 billion, so it's been a great return for us.

[Ann Berry]

Got it.

[Mike Dinsdale]

It's a huge return, actually.

[Ann Berry]

So given it's such a huge return, could you just walk us through the mechanics? When you do decide to sell, what is the capital gains tax exposure and how does that impact shareholders at the moment you do decide to sell that stock?

[Mike Dinsdale]

Sure. So we're getting into some details. As a closed end fund and we have a RIC status, meaning we have single layer taxation, so never definitely get into some details. We have to distribute 90% of realized gains to shareholders and we can do that through shares or cash. And so in the case of US shareholders, it does make sense to distribute some form of cash just because they have a tax obligation. For a lot of our foreign shareholders, that's not the case because they're exempt from U.S. tax. And so we would, we would prefer to distribute shares to international shareholders, but that's just part of the closed end fund and being in compliance with RIC tax status.

[Ann Berry]

So there's a lot that's going on in terms of the infrastructure of your fund. If you're managing through issues like that, can you talk to us a little bit about some of the other investments that you've made? Again, looking at your holdings, as of 630, OpenAI is in there at just under an 8% allocation. Kalshi at 6, 6% deal, just under 5%. Some others I'll come to. What's your outlook for those names? What do you think happens next for OpenAI? Do you think they go out in 27?

[Mike Dinsdale]

A few months ago I thought it was an absolute yes. At this point I think probably not. It would be the same for us as OpenAI goes public, then of course we'll sell down the position. Over time, it felt like Anthropic started to really take over headlines in terms of the competitive space against OpenAI. I think OpenAI has some challenges just in terms of its revenue base in comparison to Anthropic. Although at the same time I think those two names are multi trillion dollar companies and they're great places for us to still have an allocation with OpenAI, but I don't think it ends up being a 27. I mean, a 26 IPO. I think it is definitely a 27 IPO.

[Ann Berry]

Let's talk about another company in your portfolio, Mike, which is stripe. It's about 4% of your fund. There's big news today. We're recording on a Wednesday that Stripe is partnering with Advent International, the private equity fir in a bid to take PayPal private for just over $50 billion. What's your perspective on that possible tie up?

[Mike Dinsdale]

I mean, it seems like a pretty interesting one. In fact, I'm hearing that for the first time myself, so, you know, I'm digesting that in real time. But I mean, Stripe's an interesting one for me as I've been a CFO for 22 years before I joined up with, with Power Law. And Stripe, you know, could have been a public company 15 years ago. And it's interesting that it continues to be, to be private and really it's another name in our portfolio as well, Bricks. We're talking about companies that are highly valued in the private markets, but with really no seeming appetite to go public and staying private. And so for us to hold those assets in our structure in Power Law, I mean, those are exactly the types of assets we want to be able to give people exposure to because who knows if they are going to go public at any point soon. It doesn't seem like it. And so for us, different from traditional venture, we're happy if our companies stay private and if they stay private for decades, that's fine with us because we want to give exposure to those names on the private side.

[Ann Berry]

But as an investor, what are your thoughts on a company like Stripe, which is a startup, which has a sort of vibrancy of being a startup basically now taking on the integration potentially, if this deal goes ahead, the board meetings next week, we'll see how this unfolds. But, you know, taking on an og, right, taking on a company that struggled publicly because it's been sluggish in the face of innovation. What is your thoughts as an investor in this space for the merits of this kind of move?

[Mike Dinsdale]

But I mean, I would look at a company like Stripe and say, is it, is it not really a startup at this point? I mean, it's a pretty established, it's a pretty established brand and it's almost gone through that. It's not a startup anymore. I mean, its growth has slowed, it is ubiquitous. It is, it is a leader itself and it's operating like a public company. And I'd say the same thing about companies like databricks. And so that's one of the things that we saw when we started Power Law, that there are companies like Stripe and databricks that are operating like public companies. There are liquid markets around these names. Most people are locked out of it. 90% of US households don't have any access to these names, period, as they're not accredited. But the idea is these companies and so taking on something like, like PayPal. It does seem like there's a lot of synergies. But at the end of the day, they are operating like a public company. And that and their infrastructure, they're reporting. Not externally, obviously, but internally. I mean, at the end of the day, these are public companies. And that's the part that's broken. There should be, you know, solving this from both sides makes sense. Meaning that there needs to be incentives for these big mega privates to go public. And the reason they don't need to is access to capital. They don't need any access to capital. We have the emergence of mega funds and then it's just the idea to go public and all of a sudden have that regulatory framework, transparency, and all the things that they don't need to deal with as a private company. So that part needs to be fixed too, or else we're never going to solve this, this problem in terms of having all of these big private companies. There's no incentive public.

[Ann Berry]

Let's take a break and when we come back, more of my conversation with Mike Dinsdale. Visible puts the ultimate wireless hack in the palm of your hand with unlimited 5G wireless data and hotspot designed to keep you connected. Powered by Verizon's 5G network and no

[Mike Dinsdale]

contract holding you back.

[Ann Berry]

Plans start at $25 a month. Or get the premium visible Plus Pro plan and save $10 on your first month. When you use promo code hack, make the switch at visible do terms apply? See visible.com for details.

[Mike Dinsdale]

Bitcoin can be intimidating. I wasn't sure how to use it.

[Aflac Representative]

People often talk about Bitcoin as an investment, but it's built to be used with cash app. You can actually do that. Send bitcoin instantly, pay it local businesses using square, or move it to your own wallet whenever you want.

[Mike Dinsdale]

It works more like real money and less like something locked in an account

[Aflac Representative]

for a limited time. New customers get $10 added to their balance. Just use code Bitcoin10 when you sign up. And don't forget this part. Send at least $5 to a friend in the first two weeks, terms apply. Cash App is a financial services platform, not a bank. Banking services provided by Cash App's bank partners.

[Mike Dinsdale]

Bitcoin services provided by Block Inc. Brand. For additional information, see the Bitcoin disclosures at Cash App Legal podcast.

[Ann Berry]

And now back to my conversation with Mike Dinsdale, CEO of Power Law Corp. Do you think that's changing though, and that SpaceX is changing the narrative and the fact that OpenAI and anthropic and now Deep Sea are electing to at least explore going public? You know, we saw SpaceX pretty much out of the gate making a big acquisition and lots of folks have said, look, one of the reasons for doing that was by being public and having a liquid market for stock, there's an ability to one attract talent, but to have a currency with which to do really meaningful M and A. So do you think we're coming to the end of that window, Mike, where it's been about staying private for as long as possible?

[Mike Dinsdale]

I think, I mean those three companies are unique and I mean the amount of capital they raised in the private markets and to some degree you could make the argument that they were just tapping out what was available in terms of continuing to raise in the private markets. I mean, if you look at a lot of the news that we would hear around SPVs, and certainly with Anthropic sort of leading that conversation around SPVs, not so much SpaceX, but they are really tapping into not just big megas, they're tapping into family offices and the layers of SPVs. So they were really going out around the world. I spend money in the Middle east and in Asia as well. And the number of LPs that are through multi layer SPVs is shocking. And so I think there's a component with those companies specifically that they were tapping out the capital that was available to them on the private side. So I think they have to go across into the public domain. And that's what we're seeing with those three specifically. But I'm not so sure that's going deeper into the stack or that's a general trend. It doesn't feel like it. When you look at the next cohorts down, there's plenty of capital for those companies because they don't need nearly as much.

[Ann Berry]

Can we talk about one more? And then we'll go to some of the more recent additions to portfolio. There was exciting news out from Paolo today. And let's talk about Kalshi, which is just over 6% of your fund. Talk to us about, if you don't mind, the prediction markets investment thesis for you. And as an investor in this business, what do you think is coming with respect to regulation of prediction markets?

[Mike Dinsdale]

Yeah, I mean, that one's been a great return for us as well. So our cost basis there is around just over 10 billion. And so looking at around that's hopefully 40 has been a great return for us as well. And so that one's interesting. I mean, the regulatory environment is something that did give us pause in terms of doing the investment. And when we looked at, say, Poly Market as well, we decided to only put Kelshi into the portfolio just because we felt like that risk was something that's real. So in terms of where it sits, long term, it feels like, you know, maybe there's, there's still some regulatory challenges, but it feels like, you know, those hurdles have been crossed and they're becoming sort of mainstream data sources for a lot of different, a lot of different things. And that's, that's obviously positive. You know, and it's something that, you know, if you look at companies like DraftKings and others has sort of dabbled across into, into that space in a different way. You know, this has been something that's, that's, that's been a trend for, you know, for a decade in terms of, you know, prediction marketplace is becoming more mainstream.

[Ann Berry]

Let's talk about two additions that were announced today just as a result of the media taking a look at your, your SEC filings. Prometheus Industries and SHIELD I have been added to your portfolio. Can you talk to us, Mike, about how did you source those investments? Were these primary investments or were you buying in the secondary market?

[Mike Dinsdale]

Yeah. So for now, for Prometheus, it is, it is primary. You know, they just did the round, you know, and that one's, that one's an interesting one just because if you look at, you know, where the company sits today, I mean, that's betting on Jeff Bezos and then betting across a broader theme just around, you know, AI and product development and speed. And so there's, you know, that's really there and it's a small position. You know, we want to see obviously, that the company actually can come through with some of the, you know, the numbers that they're focused on in building out the company. But that's really, was his thesis, the thesis there. Now, in terms of SHIELD I mean, that's much broad. We have Saronic in our portfolio, which is direct as well. And so Saronic is a maritime drone company. People May know it because the surrounding drones were part of saving the Black Hawk pilots that went down and straight up Hormuz. And so that's just around when you look at that as a theme with the conflicts around the world and all countries looking at rearming in the face of warfare, changing where it's not $40 million tanks, now we're talking about $500 drones and autonomous vehicles. And that's the around shield obviously. And so in the future, in a part of our go forward strategy as Power Law is to launch additional funds. And we will be doing a fund that's focused on space, robotics and defense at some point in the next 12 months. Just because we think that that is the theme that matters for the next couple of decades as the world looks to rearm. And with Saronic and now SHIELD in our portfolio, clearly we believe in that as well. And we'll look to add potentially one more name into our portfolio around Defense. But we will do a concentrated fund that really gives exposure to defense space and robotics as well.

[Ann Berry]

And so to source the Shield AI investment that was a secondary, I think Mike, you sort of alluded to. Or is that a primary?

[Mike Dinsdale]

No, no, that again, I mean I can't go into exactly where the transaction. But no, that's, that's direct with. With the company through. Yeah.

[Ann Berry]

And are all of your deals direct? Are all of your investments sourced directly with the company?

[Mike Dinsdale]

No, in our portfolio it's about 50, 50 in terms of secondaries. I mean that's one of the things that Power Law as a firm has a big advantage. Our heritage is actually a secondaries firm. We've done 900 secondaries in the last 16 years that we've been around. And so we look at primaries obviously as a vehicle that is very important. And we look to go primary whenever it makes sense. But for us to build a portfolio and waiting for primary rounds doesn't really make sense. And so we're comfortable doing a lot of different structures. We're comfortable buying from founders, early employees. We're comfortable providing liquidity. When I talked about the structural problems with traditional venture, it is liquidity. And so we're more than happy to purchase from GPS that are in those names and have been in those names for a while. And they need liquidity and they need DPI for them to go and raise their next fund. And we're part of that ecosystem and that's a source of deals for us as well. The same with SPVs. We're very comfortable doing multi layer even because we have a Robust underwriting process, and we've done a large number of transactions. And so we're comfortable with every type of structure to build positions and companies, which gives us an advantage in terms of building positions in between rounds, which matters.

[Ann Berry]

Let's talk about the structure of the fund, though, and just talk a little bit, if you don't mind, about the critique that is out there, with respect to possibly a disconnect between the public trading of this kind of asset class and the guy grew up in private equity. The great question around private equity for 20 years, the great. The great question there is if the marks to market, if the marks of the valuations are being done, call it every quarter. And these are private companies, there are questions around whether there's sufficient transparency and consistency in the valuation of these companies. That's let alone before you go in and have a public listing. And you've got shareholders who are looking to see these valued more frequently. So just on that note, you know your most recently disclosed net asset value per share, which is the suggestion of the value of the portfolio per share is just over $16. But your share price, your public share price is now coming in at under 12 bucks. So there's sort of two questions there. Number one, how do you get comfort around valuing the private portfolio and coming up with that NAV number, number one? And number two, what do you say to shareholders now that your share price is trading below that level?

[Mike Dinsdale]

Yeah, I mean, there's a whole bunch of things wrapped into that question. So when I look at valuation, I'd start off with just looking at the sort of the institutional side they're allocating to venture. And so the transparency that we have compared to traditional venture is obviously different. We do have to use independent outside valuation firms. And the SEC was trying to solve some of this issue by having us be the first firm to report on a monthly basis. And so trying to make more transparency than quarterly, which does lag. I mean, if you look at our portfolio Today, inside, yes, 700 million is reported as of the end of June, but we have Kelshi Colossal and Merkor doing rounds inside the portfolio. And that's obviously going to lag in terms of where NAV really is in terms of embedded NAV in the portfolio. But in terms of valuation, it's a very difficult question. On the private side, you're looking at not just last round price, which can be stale, which is in most venture firms it is. But looking at what's happening in the broader market, obviously, if we have access to data we can't disclose that publicly, but we can use that for valuation purposes. And then looking at public comps in terms of where we trade today, I look at our type of product and look at it longer term as we start to unlock U.S. retirement, where there's 25 trillion in U.S. retirement that would like allocation to privates, volume will grow and I think the price makes sense to me that it's rational in the 30 to 50% premium range. In terms of where it sits today, there's no volume, so it's not really indicative price. Our volume is incredibly low. And part of that is because our shareholders, our LP base, which started as private investors in our fund and then converted into the public vehicle, have just high expectations of the portfolio. So there's just not a lot of appetite to sell. So when you have very low volume, that's what happens, right? There's no sellers. If you look at our volume, I haven't looked in the last hour, but we're seeing right now about 100,000 shares a day. With almost 20 million shares available to trade, there's just no appetite on RLP base to sell. And so when I look at that over a longer period of time, I mean, our share price is going to end up, obviously it's rational trading at nav. And then I think the premium develops as we just unlock a lot of demand against very limited supply with vehicles like this giving access to privates.

[Ann Berry]

But it's trading at a discount to nav. And your share price, you only went out in May and it's down 60% plus us since, since you went public in May. So something's going on. There are sellers for that, for that to have taken effect. So why is that happening? Because to your point, you've got demand for this asset category, you've got a lot of demand for tech. You're in some of the hottest names out there. I mean, I really salute you in terms of the access that you've demonstrated. It's not quite connecting in terms of the story then around your stock, when you talk to public investors or you talk to your brokerages and you try. What are they telling you, what's going on here?

[Mike Dinsdale]

Yeah, I mean, if you look at the category, right, there's, there's a couple competitors that you know that you've, you haven't talked about today, but there's a couple competitors that have, I would say similar portfolios, even though I think ours is, is superior, but they're all down. So in terms of where we trade relative to where we listed that, that again I sort of look at that and say, you know, we opened at a price that was $35 a share. So I can talk in real terms. That wasn't a real indication of value either. So what I say to, to our shareholders today is look at the value of the portfolio. That is the value of the, that's a rational place for it to trade and it will go back there. I mean I think there's been over the last month and a half a general sell off in tech, you know SpaceX. In terms of sucking all the air out of the room in retail as well. It's kind of hard to understand exactly the impact but I think that's part of the picture. There's just not the same appetite Space X being down below its IPO price. None of, none of these things are helping us specifically. But I always just point back to the embedded NAV in the portfolio. The NAV at 700 million. The quality of the portfolio companies we have and believing that over the next decade those companies matter. That's what I think drives the share price over time along with volume coming online which I think will start to develop. And I point out also, I mean we listed on May 27, no one had ever heard of power law before that. So within a month you're starting to see a little bit more around our brand. We're building it slowly but even these types of vehicles, most investors are not really aware of them yet. And I think as that awareness grows, the value is clearly there at our portfolio. Then I think the stock price, the stock price will follow I guess.

[Ann Berry]

One question, how retail investors can do their own homework because you're not at least yet covered by research analysts, at least not traditional Wall street analysts. So there isn't access to that kind of outside in look at your portfolio. Unlike an operating company. It's not as though retail investors can go and either try the product themselves or you know, it's not like investing in Walmart. They can go and see a lot of independ information around some of the suppliers to Walmart plus a lot of disclosure from the company itself. Retail investors are really going to have to trust your nav. Right? Because it's very hard for retail investors to go and do independent due diligence on privately held companies which is ultimately underlying your stock.

[Mike Dinsdale]

It's an incredibly difficult one because we can't obviously disclose anything that's non public information and there's so many restrictions that we have placed on us in terms of just any communication around our portfolio companies. And I think that's all part of what has to change to open up access to privates. And I think that's, you know, again, I mean, you look at the size of some of these private companies and they really have no disclosures that they're required to do. We can't solve this problem ourselves, that is for sure. And I think, you know, my answer to that in terms of retail shareholders is they have some intuitive understanding of the value of these companies and obviously they can do their own research with what's available in the public domain. But it's just got to be a right sized allocation in terms of their overall portfolio to gain access to these privates. Clearly there's wealth creation happening and value creation happening on the private side and we give access to that. But it all comes down to the right sized allocation and risk profile of an individual shareholder.

[Ann Berry]

I watched, I think it was David Faber of CNBC interview Sam Altman. And one of the questions that was asked was once some of these private companies become of such an enormous scale and have so much public company interest tied up in them, should there be a requirement for some of these private companies to report on a more frequent basis? What's your thinking on that? It would help you for sure, I think in terms of solving some of

[Mike Dinsdale]

these regulators, didn't it? I mean, at the end of the day, I think yes. And I think when we're seeing all of the, all of the press around SPVs, part of companies like Anthropic and others warning people about SPVs is because it is a little bit of the wild west in terms of what the fee structure is, stack up ownership. And so it's really easy for unsophisticated investigators, investors to end up investing into vehicles that they don't understand the fee, stack up the structure or share ownership. And so all of that is part of, I think increasing disclosures which will again start to solve on the other side for companies not wanting to stay private because the advantage to being private isn't as big as it is today in terms of, of transparency. I've been an investor for a long time and I've almost never seen a company that's. Once I gain access to information that it's better, it's always worse. Always. There's never been, ever been an investment I've looked at where I get access to information. Finally I go, oh wow, this is so much better than I thought.

[Ann Berry]

That's fair enough.

[Mike Dinsdale]

It's always worse. And I think this is Exactly. Why? Because companies can hide behind that transparency, lack of transparency. And then some of these valuations just don't make sense. And so I think, you know, solving that problem, I think, you know, the SEC has to start to work on pieces of that, you know, and that's going to be legislative change.

[Ann Berry]

So just a final question for you Mike. As you look out there at the private companies you think are really exciting and where Power Law does not have an allocation at least yet, what would be the sort of top two or three on the wish list? What are you keeping your eyes on?

[Mike Dinsdale]

I mean there's, I think there's a company, there's a company called Applied Intuition that we're not an investor in, which I absolutely love. And I think there's a lot on the defense side. I mean we're not an investor in Anduril. Clearly that's a company that we would like to be, that is meaningful and does matter. When we think about rearming and next primes in terms of future funds, we will look to do something that goes deeper across AI. I mean I think AI obviously as a, a multi decade trend, there's massive amounts of value creation happening now that we have infrastructure and we of course have OpenAI and anthropic and there it's companies that, that do have true data moats that are focused on, on you know, specific problems like say open open evidence or things like this that are focused on specific problems with moats that I think are defensible. So those are the kinds of names we look at, at adding into our existing portfolio. But also when we think about future, future funds focusing on AI. And I already talked about space, robotics and defense, you know, other themes that I think are really meaningful and matter for the next decade.

[Ann Berry]

Mike Dinsdale of Power Law Ticker pwrl, thank you for the insight. Come back. It's early, early days for you so there'll be a lot going on. Thank you, thank you so much.

[Mike Dinsdale]

Appreciate your time.

[Ann Berry]

Well, huge thanks to Mike Dinsdale for his candor and his great energy in joining us today. That's it for today's Brew Markets Daily. Have a great weekend.