View All News

Channelchek-in

Virtual & In-person Roadshows / Conferences

Channelchek Premium. Access more at no cost. 

The site "channelcheck" is opened on the phone

Join the Channelchek Investor Community to access equity research, video content, events, and much more. All at no cost. 

Access to Exclusive Content. FREE for Registered Users Only. 

Click “Log In” to agree to Channelchek.com <a href="#">Terms of Use</a> and acknowledge that Channelchek.com <a href="#">Privacy Policy</a> applies to you.

Welcome to the Channelchek Investor Community

Informed investors make more money. And it’s all about timing. Get it when it happens.

Inbox Intel from Channelchek.

For the first time in more than two years, U.S. home prices have dipped into negative territory, slipping 1.4% in just the last three months. High-frequency data from Parcl Labs shows a modest decline nationally, but the shift carries more weight than the numbers suggest. After a long stretch of rising prices fueled by pandemic demand, extremely low inventory, and a surge in relocation activity, the market is now feeling the effects of high mortgage rates, slower buyer activity, and a consumer who is becoming increasingly cautious. For small-cap investors, this change in the housing landscape serves as a valuable indicator of broader economic sentiment.



The housing market has been wrestling with affordability pressures since mortgage rates spiked in 2022 and 2023, with the 30-year fixed rate jumping from under 4% to more than 7%. That rapid climb priced out large segments of buyers and forced sellers to adjust their expectations. While inventory is still historically low, active listings have risen 13% year over year, and many sellers are pulling their homes off the market entirely due to low demand. That type of hesitation reflects real-time consumer behavior—people are slowing down major purchases, reevaluating budgets, and becoming more selective. Housing tends to reveal economic shifts early, and the current softness mirrors the same cautious tone we’ve been seeing in certain pockets of the small-cap market.



Regionally, the data is even more telling. Markets like Austin are down 10% year over year, with Denver, Tampa, Houston, Atlanta, and Phoenix also showing notable declines. Meanwhile, cities like Cleveland, Chicago, New York, Philadelphia, and Boston are still posting price gains. This split environment is a reminder that the national average rarely tells the full story—both in real estate and in equities. Small-cap stocks behave the same way: some regions and sectors weaken sharply while others show surprising strength. Investors who learn to spot these patterns early often outperform.



Another challenge is the lack of updated government housing reports due to the recent federal shutdown. Without fresh data on housing starts, permits, or new home sales, analysts are relying heavily on private data, builder sentiment, and earnings commentary. Homebuilders themselves describe a market with weak demand and ongoing incentives, and their sentiment remains deep in negative territory. That combination—soft demand, cautious consumers, and uneven regional performance—is exactly the kind of environment where small caps tend to lag temporarily before outperforming when conditions improve.



Mortgage rates have barely moved in the last three months, even after the Fed’s recent rate cut, suggesting that home prices may hover around zero growth for some time. But for small-cap investors, this stability isn’t a bad thing. When markets pause, opportunities emerge. Historically, when housing cools without collapsing, it often sets the stage for strong small-cap recoveries once rates drift lower and consumer confidence finds its footing.



Home prices turning slightly negative isn’t a crisis—it’s a signal. It tells us the economy is recalibrating after years of aggressive tightening, and that consumers are adapting. For disciplined small-cap investors, this environment is a chance to study balance sheets, identify undervalued companies, and prepare for the next move higher. Economic resets don’t punish prepared investors—they reward them.

For the first time in more than two years, U.S. home prices have dipped into negative territory, slipping 1.4% in just the last three months. High-frequency data from Parcl Labs shows a modest decline nationally, but the shift carries more weight than the numbers suggest. After a long stretch of rising prices fueled by pandemic demand, extremely low inventory, and a surge in relocation activity, the market is now feeling the effects of high mortgage rates, slower buyer activity, and a consumer who is becoming increasingly cautious. For small-cap investors, this change in the housing landscape serves as a valuable indicator of broader economic sentiment.



The housing market has been wrestling with affordability pressures since mortgage rates spiked in 2022 and 2023, with the 30-year fixed rate jumping from under 4% to more than 7%. That rapid climb priced out large segments of buyers and forced sellers to adjust their expectations. While inventory is still historically low, active listings have risen 13% year over year, and many sellers are pulling their homes off the market entirely due to low demand. That type of hesitation reflects real-time consumer behavior—people are slowing down major purchases, reevaluating budgets, and becoming more selective. Housing tends to reveal economic shifts early, and the current softness mirrors the same cautious tone we’ve been seeing in certain pockets of the small-cap market.



Regionally, the data is even more telling. Markets like Austin are down 10% year over year, with Denver, Tampa, Houston, Atlanta, and Phoenix also showing notable declines. Meanwhile, cities like Cleveland, Chicago, New York, Philadelphia, and Boston are still posting price gains. This split environment is a reminder that the national average rarely tells the full story—both in real estate and in equities. Small-cap stocks behave the same way: some regions and sectors weaken sharply while others show surprising strength. Investors who learn to spot these patterns early often outperform.



Another challenge is the lack of updated government housing reports due to the recent federal shutdown. Without fresh data on housing starts, permits, or new home sales, analysts are relying heavily on private data, builder sentiment, and earnings commentary. Homebuilders themselves describe a market with weak demand and ongoing incentives, and their sentiment remains deep in negative territory. That combination—soft demand, cautious consumers, and uneven regional performance—is exactly the kind of environment where small caps tend to lag temporarily before outperforming when conditions improve.



Mortgage rates have barely moved in the last three months, even after the Fed’s recent rate cut, suggesting that home prices may hover around zero growth for some time. But for small-cap investors, this stability isn’t a bad thing. When markets pause, opportunities emerge. Historically, when housing cools without collapsing, it often sets the stage for strong small-cap recoveries once rates drift lower and consumer confidence finds its footing.



Home prices turning slightly negative isn’t a crisis—it’s a signal. It tells us the economy is recalibrating after years of aggressive tightening, and that consumers are adapting. For disciplined small-cap investors, this environment is a chance to study balance sheets, identify undervalued companies, and prepare for the next move higher. Economic resets don’t punish prepared investors—they reward them.

Housing Market Softens After Two-Year Run — A Shift Worth Watching

Housing

Mortgages

Noble Capital Markets Research Morning Call

The U.S. cannabis sector is heading into a potentially transformative moment as reports surface that President Donald Trump is preparing to push for a reclassification of marijuana from a Schedule I drug to Schedule III. While no final decision has been made, the conversations happening between top administration officials and industry leaders signal a serious shift in federal posture—one that could reshape the economics, legal landscape, and competitive structure of the cannabis industry. For small-cap companies operating in or around this space, the impact could be particularly significant.



Cannabis has long been stuck at the federal level in a category reserved for substances with no accepted medical use, a classification that has held back the industry for decades. Reclassifying it to Schedule III would not legalize cannabis federally, but it would meaningfully reduce the restrictions companies face. The most immediate change would be relief from Section 280E of the tax code, which currently prevents cannabis operators from deducting ordinary business expenses. Larger players with substantial revenues would feel this impact first—but small-cap companies stand to benefit disproportionately because the tax burden has historically crushed their margins and limited their ability to reinvest.



A shift to Schedule III could also open the door to greater access to banking services, institutional capital, insurance products, and credit facilities. These are areas where small-cap operators—cultivators, distributors, multi-state operators, ancillary service providers, and biotech firms researching cannabinoids—have been at a disadvantage compared with more capitalized competitors. If traditional lenders and investors begin viewing cannabis as a legitimate medical or commercial sector rather than a high-risk legal minefield, the funding gap could narrow. That alone could reshape the competitive landscape, giving innovative but undercapitalized players a fighting chance to scale.



Public small-cap cannabis stocks are already reacting. Shares across the sector surged following the news, reflecting expectations that regulatory reform would unlock new revenue opportunities and ease long-standing financial pressures. But beyond the rally, the structural implications matter more. With reclassification, companies may finally be able to reduce compliance costs, expand into new states, and invest more aggressively in product development. Small-cap players focused on medical cannabis, CBD therapeutics, agricultural technology, and retail operations could all find themselves in a stronger position.



Of course, the path forward is not guaranteed. The reclassification process requires regulatory rulemaking and could face legal challenges, political resistance, and bureaucratic delays. The mixed landscape of state laws adds another layer of complexity that will not immediately disappear. And federal rescheduling alone does not address interstate commerce restrictions or full legalization—two changes that would unlock the broadest economic benefits.



Still, even a modest shift at the federal level can materially change market dynamics. The cannabis industry has operated for years under a patchwork of conflicting rules that increase costs and protect incumbents. Any move that reduces uncertainty—even if incremental—creates an environment where smaller, nimble companies can innovate, expand, and compete more effectively.



For small-cap investors, this moment is worth watching closely. Policy changes of this scale tend to create inefficiencies and valuation gaps, especially in sectors where regulation has held back growth. While volatility is likely as the political process unfolds, the prospect of lower taxes, reduced compliance friction, and increased access to capital could mark the beginning of a new cycle for cannabis-related equities.

The U.S. cannabis sector is heading into a potentially transformative moment as reports surface that President Donald Trump is preparing to push for a reclassification of marijuana from a Schedule I drug to Schedule III. While no final decision has been made, the conversations happening between top administration officials and industry leaders signal a serious shift in federal posture—one that could reshape the economics, legal landscape, and competitive structure of the cannabis industry. For small-cap companies operating in or around this space, the impact could be particularly significant.



Cannabis has long been stuck at the federal level in a category reserved for substances with no accepted medical use, a classification that has held back the industry for decades. Reclassifying it to Schedule III would not legalize cannabis federally, but it would meaningfully reduce the restrictions companies face. The most immediate change would be relief from Section 280E of the tax code, which currently prevents cannabis operators from deducting ordinary business expenses. Larger players with substantial revenues would feel this impact first—but small-cap companies stand to benefit disproportionately because the tax burden has historically crushed their margins and limited their ability to reinvest.



A shift to Schedule III could also open the door to greater access to banking services, institutional capital, insurance products, and credit facilities. These are areas where small-cap operators—cultivators, distributors, multi-state operators, ancillary service providers, and biotech firms researching cannabinoids—have been at a disadvantage compared with more capitalized competitors. If traditional lenders and investors begin viewing cannabis as a legitimate medical or commercial sector rather than a high-risk legal minefield, the funding gap could narrow. That alone could reshape the competitive landscape, giving innovative but undercapitalized players a fighting chance to scale.



Public small-cap cannabis stocks are already reacting. Shares across the sector surged following the news, reflecting expectations that regulatory reform would unlock new revenue opportunities and ease long-standing financial pressures. But beyond the rally, the structural implications matter more. With reclassification, companies may finally be able to reduce compliance costs, expand into new states, and invest more aggressively in product development. Small-cap players focused on medical cannabis, CBD therapeutics, agricultural technology, and retail operations could all find themselves in a stronger position.



Of course, the path forward is not guaranteed. The reclassification process requires regulatory rulemaking and could face legal challenges, political resistance, and bureaucratic delays. The mixed landscape of state laws adds another layer of complexity that will not immediately disappear. And federal rescheduling alone does not address interstate commerce restrictions or full legalization—two changes that would unlock the broadest economic benefits.



Still, even a modest shift at the federal level can materially change market dynamics. The cannabis industry has operated for years under a patchwork of conflicting rules that increase costs and protect incumbents. Any move that reduces uncertainty—even if incremental—creates an environment where smaller, nimble companies can innovate, expand, and compete more effectively.



For small-cap investors, this moment is worth watching closely. Policy changes of this scale tend to create inefficiencies and valuation gaps, especially in sectors where regulation has held back growth. While volatility is likely as the political process unfolds, the prospect of lower taxes, reduced compliance friction, and increased access to capital could mark the beginning of a new cycle for cannabis-related equities.

Federal Move on Marijuana Rescheduling Could Reshape the Sector

The Federal Reserve’s December policy meeting delivered a third consecutive quarter-point rate cut, bringing the federal funds rate down to a 3.5%–3.75% range. But the decision was far from unanimous. In fact, the meeting produced the highest number of dissents in more than six years, with Chicago Fed President Austan Goolsbee, Kansas City Fed President Jeff Schmid, and Fed Governor Stephen Miran all breaking from the majority. Their reasons shed light on why the central bank remains cautious—and why some policymakers believe the Fed should have waited before easing further.



At the core of the dissent is a simple theme: uncertainty. Goolsbee and Schmid both argued that the Fed lacks enough recent data to justify another cut. With government reporting disrupted and key inflation releases delayed, the policymakers said they were uncomfortable lowering rates again without a clearer picture of how prices and demand are evolving. Goolsbee stressed that waiting until early 2026 for updated data would not have introduced meaningful economic risk, but it would have allowed the Fed to make a more informed call. In his view, patience was the more prudent option.



Both Goolsbee and Schmid pointed to inflation as the most compelling reason to pause. After moving sharply lower in 2023, progress on inflation has stalled for several months. Businesses across multiple sectors continue to cite rising input costs, and consumer surveys show persistent unease about prices. Schmid went further, warning that inflation is still “too hot” and that the economy’s ongoing momentum suggests current policy may not be restrictive enough. He raised the concern that households and firms could begin incorporating inflation into their everyday decision-making—a trend that historically makes inflation harder to bring down.



Goolsbee acknowledged that some price pressures appear tied to tariffs and may prove temporary, but he also highlighted risks that inflation in services could remain sticky. With the labor market cooling gradually rather than sharply, he argued there is no urgent economic threat that requires cutting rates before more evidence arrives. Hiring and firing activity has slowed into what he described as a “low hiring/low firing” environment—typical of businesses navigating uncertainty rather than signaling any dramatic downturn.



Fed Governor Stephen Miran dissented for a different reason, preferring a larger 0.50% cut. His stance reflects the broader tension within the central bank: some officials fear easing too slowly risks stalling momentum, while others worry easing too quickly risks reigniting inflation. The result is a policy landscape where the Fed is attempting to balance growth risks against inflation risks in real time, with incomplete information.



Still, the majority of the committee moved forward with the cut, signaling confidence that inflation will eventually resume its downward trend. But the dissents highlight that key voices inside the central bank are urging caution. For investors, the takeaway is straightforward: the Fed is not unanimously convinced that the inflation battle is over, and future rate moves may be more contested than markets expect.

The Federal Reserve’s December policy meeting delivered a third consecutive quarter-point rate cut, bringing the federal funds rate down to a 3.5%–3.75% range. But the decision was far from unanimous. In fact, the meeting produced the highest number of dissents in more than six years, with Chicago Fed President Austan Goolsbee, Kansas City Fed President Jeff Schmid, and Fed Governor Stephen Miran all breaking from the majority. Their reasons shed light on why the central bank remains cautious—and why some policymakers believe the Fed should have waited before easing further.



At the core of the dissent is a simple theme: uncertainty. Goolsbee and Schmid both argued that the Fed lacks enough recent data to justify another cut. With government reporting disrupted and key inflation releases delayed, the policymakers said they were uncomfortable lowering rates again without a clearer picture of how prices and demand are evolving. Goolsbee stressed that waiting until early 2026 for updated data would not have introduced meaningful economic risk, but it would have allowed the Fed to make a more informed call. In his view, patience was the more prudent option.



Both Goolsbee and Schmid pointed to inflation as the most compelling reason to pause. After moving sharply lower in 2023, progress on inflation has stalled for several months. Businesses across multiple sectors continue to cite rising input costs, and consumer surveys show persistent unease about prices. Schmid went further, warning that inflation is still “too hot” and that the economy’s ongoing momentum suggests current policy may not be restrictive enough. He raised the concern that households and firms could begin incorporating inflation into their everyday decision-making—a trend that historically makes inflation harder to bring down.



Goolsbee acknowledged that some price pressures appear tied to tariffs and may prove temporary, but he also highlighted risks that inflation in services could remain sticky. With the labor market cooling gradually rather than sharply, he argued there is no urgent economic threat that requires cutting rates before more evidence arrives. Hiring and firing activity has slowed into what he described as a “low hiring/low firing” environment—typical of businesses navigating uncertainty rather than signaling any dramatic downturn.



Fed Governor Stephen Miran dissented for a different reason, preferring a larger 0.50% cut. His stance reflects the broader tension within the central bank: some officials fear easing too slowly risks stalling momentum, while others worry easing too quickly risks reigniting inflation. The result is a policy landscape where the Fed is attempting to balance growth risks against inflation risks in real time, with incomplete information.



Still, the majority of the committee moved forward with the cut, signaling confidence that inflation will eventually resume its downward trend. But the dissents highlight that key voices inside the central bank are urging caution. For investors, the takeaway is straightforward: the Fed is not unanimously convinced that the inflation battle is over, and future rate moves may be more contested than markets expect.

Not Everyone Agreed: The Argument for Holding Rates Steady

The global shift toward electrification is accelerating, and with it comes a renewed focus on the minerals that make modern energy and technology possible. Lithium, nickel, graphite, phosphate, rare earths, and other essential materials are the backbone of batteries, solar panels, electric vehicles, and grid-scale storage. As nations push to secure supply chains and reduce dependence on foreign imports, the critical minerals sector is becoming one of the most strategically important areas in global markets. For small-cap investors, this creates a compelling landscape of early-stage opportunities.



Large producers tend to dominate the headlines, but the real innovation and discovery often originate in the junior and small-cap space. These companies take on the high-risk, early exploration work that can eventually create meaningful supply for downstream industries. While these stocks can be volatile, they also offer leverage to rising demand and tightening supply conditions that can dramatically reprice assets once the market recognizes their potential.



One example of this emerging potential can be seen in the phosphate segment. Phosphate is best known for its role in agriculture, but it is increasingly valuable as a component in lithium iron phosphate (LFP) batteries. This chemistry has become a preferred option for EV manufacturers and grid-storage systems due to its safety profile, long cycle life, and lower cost. As LFP adoption expands, the need for battery-grade phosphate grows alongside it.



Emerging growth companies<a href="https://www.channelchek.com/company/frspf"> such as First Phosphate</a> have positioned themselves within this shift. While still small-cap in size, the focus on high-purity phosphate projects in geopolitically stable regions aligns with what major battery and automotive manufacturers are now seeking: secure, traceable, and environmentally responsible supply. These are qualities that the North American market in particular is trying to build as part of a broader strategy to reduce reliance on overseas sources.



<a href="https://www.channelchek.com/videos/first-phosphate-noblecon21-presentation-replay">Click here to watch First Phosphate's corporate presentation at NobleCon21.</a>



Beyond phosphate, other critical minerals are facing similar supply-demand pressures. Graphite remains essential for battery anodes, yet most production is concentrated in a single country. Rare earth elements are required for EV motors and wind turbines, but refining capacity is limited and slow to build. Nickel and manganese face challenges tied to environmental impacts and inconsistent global supply. In each of these segments, small-cap exploration and development companies are working to advance projects that could eventually scale into meaningful contributors to the supply chain.



For investors willing to put in the research, the small-cap critical minerals sector offers exposure to themes that are likely to play out over decades. Governments are investing heavily in domestic mineral strategies, electrification continues to expand worldwide, and technology companies are demanding reliable inputs to meet their production goals. These forces create a long runway for companies that can deliver high-purity materials at competitive costs.



Small-cap investing in this space still requires discipline. Projects take time to develop, capital needs can be significant, and not every discovery becomes a mine. But for investors looking for early entry points into the minerals reshaping the global energy landscape, this sector provides a combination of macro tailwinds and company-specific catalysts that can create real opportunity when approached carefully.

The global shift toward electrification is accelerating, and with it comes a renewed focus on the minerals that make modern energy and technology possible. Lithium, nickel, graphite, phosphate, rare earths, and other essential materials are the backbone of batteries, solar panels, electric vehicles, and grid-scale storage. As nations push to secure supply chains and reduce dependence on foreign imports, the critical minerals sector is becoming one of the most strategically important areas in global markets. For small-cap investors, this creates a compelling landscape of early-stage opportunities.



Large producers tend to dominate the headlines, but the real innovation and discovery often originate in the junior and small-cap space. These companies take on the high-risk, early exploration work that can eventually create meaningful supply for downstream industries. While these stocks can be volatile, they also offer leverage to rising demand and tightening supply conditions that can dramatically reprice assets once the market recognizes their potential.



One example of this emerging potential can be seen in the phosphate segment. Phosphate is best known for its role in agriculture, but it is increasingly valuable as a component in lithium iron phosphate (LFP) batteries. This chemistry has become a preferred option for EV manufacturers and grid-storage systems due to its safety profile, long cycle life, and lower cost. As LFP adoption expands, the need for battery-grade phosphate grows alongside it.



Emerging growth companies such as First Phosphate have positioned themselves within this shift. While still small-cap in size, the focus on high-purity phosphate projects in geopolitically stable regions aligns with what major battery and automotive manufacturers are now seeking: secure, traceable, and environmentally responsible supply. These are qualities that the North American market in particular is trying to build as part of a broader strategy to reduce reliance on overseas sources.



Click here to watch First Phosphate&#8217;s corporate presentation at NobleCon21.



Beyond phosphate, other critical minerals are facing similar supply-demand pressures. Graphite remains essential for battery anodes, yet most production is concentrated in a single country. Rare earth elements are required for EV motors and wind turbines, but refining capacity is limited and slow to build. Nickel and manganese face challenges tied to environmental impacts and inconsistent global supply. In each of these segments, small-cap exploration and development companies are working to advance projects that could eventually scale into meaningful contributors to the supply chain.



For investors willing to put in the research, the small-cap critical minerals sector offers exposure to themes that are likely to play out over decades. Governments are investing heavily in domestic mineral strategies, electrification continues to expand worldwide, and technology companies are demanding reliable inputs to meet their production goals. These forces create a long runway for companies that can deliver high-purity materials at competitive costs.



Small-cap investing in this space still requires discipline. Projects take time to develop, capital needs can be significant, and not every discovery becomes a mine. But for investors looking for early entry points into the minerals reshaping the global energy landscape, this sector provides a combination of macro tailwinds and company-specific catalysts that can create real opportunity when approached carefully.

Why Critical Minerals Could Be the Next Big Frontier for Small-Cap Investors

Critical Minerals

First Phosphate

Mining

Phosphate

The asset-management industry is entering another phase of consolidation, highlighted by First Eagle Investments’ agreement to acquire Diamond Hill Investment Group in a deal valued at approximately $473 million. The all-cash transaction marks a significant premium for Diamond Hill shareholders and positions both firms to expand their capabilities in an increasingly competitive market for active management.



Under the terms of the agreement, First Eagle will purchase all outstanding shares of Diamond Hill for $175 per share. The price reflects a premium of nearly 50% over Diamond Hill’s closing price on December 10, 2025, and more than 40% above the company’s 30-day volume-weighted average price. With this valuation, Diamond Hill shareholders realize immediate financial benefit, while First Eagle secures a platform that strengthens its presence across key asset classes.



The strategic rationale centers on complementary strengths between the two firms. First Eagle, which oversees a diversified mix of equity, fixed income, alternative credit, and multi-asset strategies, gains a larger footprint in traditional fixed income through Diamond Hill’s growing franchise in that category. For Diamond Hill, the combination adds global resources, broader distribution reach, and operational depth without altering the core investment philosophy that has shaped the firm for more than two decades.



Diamond Hill’s U.S.-focused multi-cap equity approach aligns with First Eagle’s existing global equity and small-cap capabilities. This creates a more rounded platform for clients who want differentiated active-management styles across both domestic and international markets. Importantly, Diamond Hill will maintain its brand, investment process, and headquarters in Columbus following the completion of the transaction. Its investment teams are expected to remain in place, preserving continuity for existing clients.



The combined organization will oversee roughly $208 billion in assets under management and advisement on a pro forma basis as of the most recent reporting date. By operating at a larger scale, the firms anticipate improved efficiency, stronger product breadth, and enhanced competitiveness across the financial advisor and institutional channels.



The agreement also includes a formal “go-shop” period, allowing Diamond Hill to solicit alternative acquisition proposals for 35 days following the announcement. While there is no guarantee of a competing bid, the mechanism ensures fiduciary flexibility while the board evaluates shareholder value.



Subject to shareholder and regulatory approvals, the transaction is expected to close by the third quarter of 2026. Diamond Hill will suspend its quarterly dividends through closing, and its shares will be delisted from Nasdaq once the acquisition is finalized. There are no financing contingencies tied to the deal, which adds clarity to the expected timeline.



The acquisition underscores how firms with long-term investment philosophies are adapting to market pressures through scale, resource expansion, and strategic alignment. By combining Diamond Hill’s valuation-driven discipline with First Eagle’s global reach and historical focus on capital stewardship, the new partnership aims to create a more robust platform positioned for varied market cycles.



As consolidation continues across the asset-management industry, this transaction highlights how firms are pursuing strategic combinations to strengthen client offerings while delivering value to shareholders.

The asset-management industry is entering another phase of consolidation, highlighted by First Eagle Investments’ agreement to acquire Diamond Hill Investment Group in a deal valued at approximately $473 million. The all-cash transaction marks a significant premium for Diamond Hill shareholders and positions both firms to expand their capabilities in an increasingly competitive market for active management.



Under the terms of the agreement, First Eagle will purchase all outstanding shares of Diamond Hill for $175 per share. The price reflects a premium of nearly 50% over Diamond Hill’s closing price on December 10, 2025, and more than 40% above the company’s 30-day volume-weighted average price. With this valuation, Diamond Hill shareholders realize immediate financial benefit, while First Eagle secures a platform that strengthens its presence across key asset classes.



The strategic rationale centers on complementary strengths between the two firms. First Eagle, which oversees a diversified mix of equity, fixed income, alternative credit, and multi-asset strategies, gains a larger footprint in traditional fixed income through Diamond Hill’s growing franchise in that category. For Diamond Hill, the combination adds global resources, broader distribution reach, and operational depth without altering the core investment philosophy that has shaped the firm for more than two decades.



Diamond Hill’s U.S.-focused multi-cap equity approach aligns with First Eagle’s existing global equity and small-cap capabilities. This creates a more rounded platform for clients who want differentiated active-management styles across both domestic and international markets. Importantly, Diamond Hill will maintain its brand, investment process, and headquarters in Columbus following the completion of the transaction. Its investment teams are expected to remain in place, preserving continuity for existing clients.



The combined organization will oversee roughly $208 billion in assets under management and advisement on a pro forma basis as of the most recent reporting date. By operating at a larger scale, the firms anticipate improved efficiency, stronger product breadth, and enhanced competitiveness across the financial advisor and institutional channels.



The agreement also includes a formal “go-shop” period, allowing Diamond Hill to solicit alternative acquisition proposals for 35 days following the announcement. While there is no guarantee of a competing bid, the mechanism ensures fiduciary flexibility while the board evaluates shareholder value.



Subject to shareholder and regulatory approvals, the transaction is expected to close by the third quarter of 2026. Diamond Hill will suspend its quarterly dividends through closing, and its shares will be delisted from Nasdaq once the acquisition is finalized. There are no financing contingencies tied to the deal, which adds clarity to the expected timeline.



The acquisition underscores how firms with long-term investment philosophies are adapting to market pressures through scale, resource expansion, and strategic alignment. By combining Diamond Hill’s valuation-driven discipline with First Eagle’s global reach and historical focus on capital stewardship, the new partnership aims to create a more robust platform positioned for varied market cycles.



As consolidation continues across the asset-management industry, this transaction highlights how firms are pursuing strategic combinations to strengthen client offerings while delivering value to shareholders.

First Eagle Moves to Acquire Diamond Hill in $473 Million Deal

Asset Management

Diamond Hill

First Eagle

M&amp;A

The Russell 2000 hit a fresh record as investors rotated into small-cap equities on renewed optimism that looser monetary policy could be on the horizon. The benchmark’s leadership reflects a market dynamic in which hopes for easier financial conditions are outweighing pockets of economic strength that have pushed yields higher across parts of the curve.



A string of private and partial data released ahead of the Federal Reserve’s final policy decision for the year painted a mixed picture of the U.S. economy. Weekly payroll indicators showed a marked improvement compared with recent losses, reversing a short stretch of weak readings and signaling that private-sector hiring has regained momentum in recent weeks. Meanwhile, labor demand metrics measuring job openings remained elevated, with vacancies concentrated in sectors such as retail, healthcare, transportation and manufacturing. That combination suggests employers are still searching for workers even as the pace of hiring fluctuates month to month.



Small business sentiment also ticked up, ending a multi-month slide and reflecting firmer revenue expectations and plans to add staff. At the same time, concerns persist about capital spending intentions and tight credit conditions, factors that temper enthusiasm for a broad-based recovery. Taken together, the data show a labor market that remains resilient in parts, but uneven across industries and firm sizes.



Market participants have zeroed in on how the Fed will interpret this mosaic of signals. Stronger-than-expected reads in select indicators have pushed short-term yields higher in a curve-flattening move that suggests traders are re-pricing the odds for near-term policy easing. The level of dissent within the Federal Open Market Committee will be closely watched; a higher number of officials opposing a December cut would signal persistent caution and could damp investor expectations for aggressive easing next year.



The Russell 2000’s rebound is notable because small caps tend to be more sensitive to financial conditions and credit availability. In an environment where rate-cut prospects rise, borrowing costs for smaller companies fall relative to a no-cut scenario, improving the outlook for earnings growth and refinancing. That dynamic has attracted reallocations away from megacap tech names and toward cyclical and domestically focused firms that stand to benefit from cheaper financing and a healthier consumer.



Yet the backdrop is not without risk. A recent pick-up in yield volatility and signs that some central banks are nearing the end of their easing cycles in other economies add uncertainty for global liquidity. Additional data surprises could quickly recalibrate expectations, and market pricing already reflects a degree of vulnerability to upside surprises in inflation or employment.



For investors, the current market action underscores the importance of monitoring both macro signals and monetary policy cues. Small caps have led the charge on the upside, but their outperformance is tied to the narrative of easier policy ahead. Should that narrative unravel, leadership could shift again.



As the Fed approaches its next meeting, markets will continue to weigh the tug of mixed economic data against the growing desire for lower interest rates. The Russell 2000’s new high is as much a reflection of positioning for future policy as it is a barometer of confidence in the domestic economic cycle.

The Russell 2000 hit a fresh record as investors rotated into small-cap equities on renewed optimism that looser monetary policy could be on the horizon. The benchmark’s leadership reflects a market dynamic in which hopes for easier financial conditions are outweighing pockets of economic strength that have pushed yields higher across parts of the curve.



A string of private and partial data released ahead of the Federal Reserve’s final policy decision for the year painted a mixed picture of the U.S. economy. Weekly payroll indicators showed a marked improvement compared with recent losses, reversing a short stretch of weak readings and signaling that private-sector hiring has regained momentum in recent weeks. Meanwhile, labor demand metrics measuring job openings remained elevated, with vacancies concentrated in sectors such as retail, healthcare, transportation and manufacturing. That combination suggests employers are still searching for workers even as the pace of hiring fluctuates month to month.



Small business sentiment also ticked up, ending a multi-month slide and reflecting firmer revenue expectations and plans to add staff. At the same time, concerns persist about capital spending intentions and tight credit conditions, factors that temper enthusiasm for a broad-based recovery. Taken together, the data show a labor market that remains resilient in parts, but uneven across industries and firm sizes.



Market participants have zeroed in on how the Fed will interpret this mosaic of signals. Stronger-than-expected reads in select indicators have pushed short-term yields higher in a curve-flattening move that suggests traders are re-pricing the odds for near-term policy easing. The level of dissent within the Federal Open Market Committee will be closely watched; a higher number of officials opposing a December cut would signal persistent caution and could damp investor expectations for aggressive easing next year.



The Russell 2000’s rebound is notable because small caps tend to be more sensitive to financial conditions and credit availability. In an environment where rate-cut prospects rise, borrowing costs for smaller companies fall relative to a no-cut scenario, improving the outlook for earnings growth and refinancing. That dynamic has attracted reallocations away from megacap tech names and toward cyclical and domestically focused firms that stand to benefit from cheaper financing and a healthier consumer.



Yet the backdrop is not without risk. A recent pick-up in yield volatility and signs that some central banks are nearing the end of their easing cycles in other economies add uncertainty for global liquidity. Additional data surprises could quickly recalibrate expectations, and market pricing already reflects a degree of vulnerability to upside surprises in inflation or employment.



For investors, the current market action underscores the importance of monitoring both macro signals and monetary policy cues. Small caps have led the charge on the upside, but their outperformance is tied to the narrative of easier policy ahead. Should that narrative unravel, leadership could shift again.



As the Fed approaches its next meeting, markets will continue to weigh the tug of mixed economic data against the growing desire for lower interest rates. The Russell 2000’s new high is as much a reflection of positioning for future policy as it is a barometer of confidence in the domestic economic cycle.

Russell 2000 Scores Record as Rate-Cut Hopes Boost Small-Cap Appetite

SpaceX’s potential IPO is shaping up to be one of the most pivotal market events of the decade, with implications that reach far beyond the company itself. Analysts estimate that a SpaceX listing could help unlock nearly $3 trillion worth of value tied up in large private companies that have avoided the public markets for years. The anticipation surrounding this single event is already pushing investors, bankers, and late-stage startups to rethink the divide between private and public valuations.



After the blockbuster IPO wave of 2021, the market grew unusually quiet. Many of the world’s most valuable private companies, including SpaceX, Stripe, and ByteDance, chose to continue raising funds privately. This allowed them to grow far larger than the typical public-market debutant while sidestepping the scrutiny of quarterly reporting. SpaceX sits at the top of this group, with private valuations ranging from $800 billion to a possible $1.5 trillion. A listing of that size would instantly become the largest in history and would test the limits of both investor appetite and market infrastructure.



Despite the concerns, the demand appears strong. SpaceX is viewed as a company that combines scale, technological leadership, and global relevance. Its advancements in reusable rockets, crewed orbital launches, and satellite internet have created capabilities unmatched in the private sector. Starlink alone now provides high-speed connectivity to millions of users, and the company’s planned direct-to-cell network has gained additional momentum through strategic spectrum acquisitions.



The company’s revenue trajectory adds to the optimism. Estimates place 2025 revenue at roughly $15 billion, with expectations of reaching more than $22 billion the following year. These figures put SpaceX among the highest-earning private firms in the world, though some observers argue that such revenue still leaves questions about trillion-dollar valuations. For many investors, the financials need to support not only growth but also profitability and scale under the discipline of the public markets.



Governance is another area under scrutiny. SpaceX operates in a unique position, driven by an aggressive engineering culture and long-term missions that include the development of Starship and eventual human flights to Mars. These projects are capital-intensive and often involve timelines that do not align naturally with short-term shareholder expectations. Going public would introduce new oversight, regulatory obligations, and investor influence, potentially altering the company’s traditionally independent operating style.



Another open question is what path SpaceX might take to enter the public markets. A traditional IPO would require raising tens of billions of dollars if even a small percentage of the company were sold. Some market participants believe a direct listing could be more practical, especially for a company that does not need to raise fresh capital and already has a large institutional shareholder base.



Regardless of the route, a SpaceX listing in 2026 would represent a watershed moment. It could reopen the window for many large private firms that have delayed going public and force a reevaluation of how extreme private-market valuations translate to public markets. If successful, it may trigger a wave of mega-IPOs that reshape market dynamics for years to come.

SpaceX’s potential IPO is shaping up to be one of the most pivotal market events of the decade, with implications that reach far beyond the company itself. Analysts estimate that a SpaceX listing could help unlock nearly $3 trillion worth of value tied up in large private companies that have avoided the public markets for years. The anticipation surrounding this single event is already pushing investors, bankers, and late-stage startups to rethink the divide between private and public valuations.



After the blockbuster IPO wave of 2021, the market grew unusually quiet. Many of the world’s most valuable private companies, including SpaceX, Stripe, and ByteDance, chose to continue raising funds privately. This allowed them to grow far larger than the typical public-market debutant while sidestepping the scrutiny of quarterly reporting. SpaceX sits at the top of this group, with private valuations ranging from $800 billion to a possible $1.5 trillion. A listing of that size would instantly become the largest in history and would test the limits of both investor appetite and market infrastructure.



Despite the concerns, the demand appears strong. SpaceX is viewed as a company that combines scale, technological leadership, and global relevance. Its advancements in reusable rockets, crewed orbital launches, and satellite internet have created capabilities unmatched in the private sector. Starlink alone now provides high-speed connectivity to millions of users, and the company’s planned direct-to-cell network has gained additional momentum through strategic spectrum acquisitions.



The company’s revenue trajectory adds to the optimism. Estimates place 2025 revenue at roughly $15 billion, with expectations of reaching more than $22 billion the following year. These figures put SpaceX among the highest-earning private firms in the world, though some observers argue that such revenue still leaves questions about trillion-dollar valuations. For many investors, the financials need to support not only growth but also profitability and scale under the discipline of the public markets.



Governance is another area under scrutiny. SpaceX operates in a unique position, driven by an aggressive engineering culture and long-term missions that include the development of Starship and eventual human flights to Mars. These projects are capital-intensive and often involve timelines that do not align naturally with short-term shareholder expectations. Going public would introduce new oversight, regulatory obligations, and investor influence, potentially altering the company’s traditionally independent operating style.



Another open question is what path SpaceX might take to enter the public markets. A traditional IPO would require raising tens of billions of dollars if even a small percentage of the company were sold. Some market participants believe a direct listing could be more practical, especially for a company that does not need to raise fresh capital and already has a large institutional shareholder base.



Regardless of the route, a SpaceX listing in 2026 would represent a watershed moment. It could reopen the window for many large private firms that have delayed going public and force a reevaluation of how extreme private-market valuations translate to public markets. If successful, it may trigger a wave of mega-IPOs that reshape market dynamics for years to come.

SpaceX’s Potential IPO Could Ignite a $2.9 Trillion Wave of Public Listings

Michael Burry, the famed investor known for predicting the 2008 housing market crash, is once again at the center of attention — this time for a surprisingly bullish stance on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. In a lengthy blog post published Monday, Burry revealed he holds sizable positions in both government-sponsored enterprises and believes their long-awaited return to public markets may be close. The disclosure has fueled excitement among investors who have followed the Fannie and Freddie saga for more than a decade.



According to Burry, a relisting of the mortgage-finance giants is “nearly upon us.” His detailed post explored the political, regulatory, and financial steps that must occur before the companies can be fully released from government control. Both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were placed into conservatorship during the 2008 crisis, and since then, multiple administrations have debated how to reform or privatize them. Burry argues that conditions are finally shifting toward a path back to Wall Street.



Michael Burry’s renewed interest in the housing-finance sector is significant given his historical role in identifying weaknesses in the mortgage market before the financial collapse. He reminded readers of this history by including excerpts from an older note in which he criticized the agencies and described his earlier investments in credit-default swaps tied to their debt. This time, however, Burry says he did not become bullish on their common stock until after Donald Trump’s presidential win last year, which he believes increased the likelihood of policy changes that benefit shareholders.



In the post, Burry stated that he owns both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac common stock “in good size,” and suggested that the offering price in any IPO will play a major role in determining their true intrinsic value. He highlighted three major changes regulators would need to make before a public offering could occur: easing capital requirements, converting certain preferred shares into common stock, and reducing the government’s senior claims on future profits. Without addressing the last issue, Burry warned that common shares could be “worthless.”



Despite the optimism, he also cautioned that the path to an IPO remains “steep, windy, and rocky,” noting that the political process could still slow progress. Shares of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac reacted positively to his commentary, rising more than 3% on Tuesday and gaining over 15% so far this month. The stocks, which trade over-the-counter, remain highly volatile as investors digest shifting expectations.



Burry’s views arrive shortly after longtime shareholder Bill Ackman proposed a plan on social media to relist the companies on the New York Stock Exchange. Meanwhile, analysts such as Bose George at Keefe Bruyette &amp; Woods remain cautious, arguing that common shareholders still face significant downside risks if reforms stall or if the government opts to convert preferred shares in a way that dilutes existing holders.



Whether Michael Burry’s thesis proves correct remains to be seen, but his involvement has injected new momentum into one of the most closely watched restructuring stories in U.S. finance.

Michael Burry, the famed investor known for predicting the 2008 housing market crash, is once again at the center of attention — this time for a surprisingly bullish stance on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. In a lengthy blog post published Monday, Burry revealed he holds sizable positions in both government-sponsored enterprises and believes their long-awaited return to public markets may be close. The disclosure has fueled excitement among investors who have followed the Fannie and Freddie saga for more than a decade.



According to Burry, a relisting of the mortgage-finance giants is “nearly upon us.” His detailed post explored the political, regulatory, and financial steps that must occur before the companies can be fully released from government control. Both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were placed into conservatorship during the 2008 crisis, and since then, multiple administrations have debated how to reform or privatize them. Burry argues that conditions are finally shifting toward a path back to Wall Street.



Michael Burry’s renewed interest in the housing-finance sector is significant given his historical role in identifying weaknesses in the mortgage market before the financial collapse. He reminded readers of this history by including excerpts from an older note in which he criticized the agencies and described his earlier investments in credit-default swaps tied to their debt. This time, however, Burry says he did not become bullish on their common stock until after Donald Trump’s presidential win last year, which he believes increased the likelihood of policy changes that benefit shareholders.



In the post, Burry stated that he owns both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac common stock “in good size,” and suggested that the offering price in any IPO will play a major role in determining their true intrinsic value. He highlighted three major changes regulators would need to make before a public offering could occur: easing capital requirements, converting certain preferred shares into common stock, and reducing the government’s senior claims on future profits. Without addressing the last issue, Burry warned that common shares could be “worthless.”



Despite the optimism, he also cautioned that the path to an IPO remains “steep, windy, and rocky,” noting that the political process could still slow progress. Shares of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac reacted positively to his commentary, rising more than 3% on Tuesday and gaining over 15% so far this month. The stocks, which trade over-the-counter, remain highly volatile as investors digest shifting expectations.



Burry’s views arrive shortly after longtime shareholder Bill Ackman proposed a plan on social media to relist the companies on the New York Stock Exchange. Meanwhile, analysts such as Bose George at Keefe Bruyette &amp; Woods remain cautious, arguing that common shareholders still face significant downside risks if reforms stall or if the government opts to convert preferred shares in a way that dilutes existing holders.



Whether Michael Burry’s thesis proves correct remains to be seen, but his involvement has injected new momentum into one of the most closely watched restructuring stories in U.S. finance.

Michael Burry Turns Bullish on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as Possible Relisting Nears

Fannie Mae

Freddie mac

Housing Sector

Michael Burry

Mirum Pharmaceuticals (NASDAQ: MIRM) has announced a definitive agreement to acquire privately held Bluejay Therapeutics in a transformative deal that expands Mirum’s leadership in rare liver diseases and adds a high-potential late-stage asset to its growing pipeline. The acquisition, valued at $620 million upfront in cash and stock — plus up to $200 million in milestone payments — brings worldwide rights to brelovitug, a fully human monoclonal antibody currently in Phase 3 development for chronic hepatitis delta virus (HDV).



For Mirum, a company already recognized for developing and commercializing rare disease therapies—including LIVMARLI, CHOLBAM and CTEXLI—the deal aligns directly with its strategic focus: advancing life-changing medicines for overlooked patient populations. HDV, the most severe form of viral hepatitis, represents a large, high unmet-need market with no FDA-approved treatments, affecting more than 230,000 people across the U.S. and Europe.



Brelovitug has already gained international attention. The therapy holds FDA Breakthrough Therapy designation and the European Medicines Agency’s PRIME and Orphan designations. In Phase 2 trials, it demonstrated strong antiviral activity and a 100% HDV RNA response rate, along with improvements in liver enzyme levels. Its safety profile has been favorable, with the most notable adverse event being injection-site reactions.



The drug is currently being evaluated in the global, registrational AZURE Phase 3 program, which is enrolling patients worldwide. Top-line results are expected in the second half of 2026, with a potential BLA submission and commercial launch in 2027. If approved, brelovitug could become the first widely available treatment for chronic HDV.



Mirum CEO Chris Peetz emphasized that the acquisition fits squarely within Mirum’s mission and capabilities. “Brelovitug in HDV leverages our deep expertise in rare liver disease and builds on the relationships we’ve established with key providers through the volixibat and LIVMARLI programs,” he said. Bluejay’s founder and CEO, Keting Chu, echoed that sentiment, noting that Mirum’s rare disease specialization makes it “the right company to carry this program forward globally.”



The acquisition will be funded through a combination of cash, Mirum common stock, and a concurrent $200 million private placement with healthcare investors. Proceeds from the placement will support both clinical development and future commercial activities. The deal not only adds a late-stage asset to Mirum’s portfolio but also positions the company for four potential registrational readouts within the next 18 months—an unusually rich pipeline for a rare-disease-focused biotech.



<h3 class="wp-block-heading">Implications for the Biotech Landscape</h3>



The acquisition underscores a broader trend in the biotechnology sector: rare disease companies with commercial infrastructure are increasingly seeking late-stage assets to accelerate revenue growth and expand global presence. For small and mid-cap biopharma firms, especially those with single or early-stage assets, partnerships or acquisitions by specialized players like Mirum remain attractive pathways to scale.



Bluejay itself represents a textbook example of a high-quality private biotech that rapidly advanced a novel therapy—from development candidate to global Phase 3 program in four years—making it an appealing target in a competitive rare-disease market.



Pending regulatory approvals, the transaction is expected to close in the first quarter of 2026. If successful, brelovitug could mark one of the most important therapeutic advancements in liver disease in decades—and a major milestone in Mirum’s evolution into a global leader in rare hepatology.

Mirum Pharmaceuticals (NASDAQ: MIRM) has announced a definitive agreement to acquire privately held Bluejay Therapeutics in a transformative deal that expands Mirum’s leadership in rare liver diseases and adds a high-potential late-stage asset to its growing pipeline. The acquisition, valued at $620 million upfront in cash and stock — plus up to $200 million in milestone payments — brings worldwide rights to brelovitug, a fully human monoclonal antibody currently in Phase 3 development for chronic hepatitis delta virus (HDV).



For Mirum, a company already recognized for developing and commercializing rare disease therapies—including LIVMARLI, CHOLBAM and CTEXLI—the deal aligns directly with its strategic focus: advancing life-changing medicines for overlooked patient populations. HDV, the most severe form of viral hepatitis, represents a large, high unmet-need market with no FDA-approved treatments, affecting more than 230,000 people across the U.S. and Europe.



Brelovitug has already gained international attention. The therapy holds FDA Breakthrough Therapy designation and the European Medicines Agency’s PRIME and Orphan designations. In Phase 2 trials, it demonstrated strong antiviral activity and a 100% HDV RNA response rate, along with improvements in liver enzyme levels. Its safety profile has been favorable, with the most notable adverse event being injection-site reactions.



The drug is currently being evaluated in the global, registrational AZURE Phase 3 program, which is enrolling patients worldwide. Top-line results are expected in the second half of 2026, with a potential BLA submission and commercial launch in 2027. If approved, brelovitug could become the first widely available treatment for chronic HDV.



Mirum CEO Chris Peetz emphasized that the acquisition fits squarely within Mirum’s mission and capabilities. “Brelovitug in HDV leverages our deep expertise in rare liver disease and builds on the relationships we’ve established with key providers through the volixibat and LIVMARLI programs,” he said. Bluejay’s founder and CEO, Keting Chu, echoed that sentiment, noting that Mirum’s rare disease specialization makes it “the right company to carry this program forward globally.”



The acquisition will be funded through a combination of cash, Mirum common stock, and a concurrent $200 million private placement with healthcare investors. Proceeds from the placement will support both clinical development and future commercial activities. The deal not only adds a late-stage asset to Mirum’s portfolio but also positions the company for four potential registrational readouts within the next 18 months—an unusually rich pipeline for a rare-disease-focused biotech.



Implications for the Biotech Landscape



The acquisition underscores a broader trend in the biotechnology sector: rare disease companies with commercial infrastructure are increasingly seeking late-stage assets to accelerate revenue growth and expand global presence. For small and mid-cap biopharma firms, especially those with single or early-stage assets, partnerships or acquisitions by specialized players like Mirum remain attractive pathways to scale.



Bluejay itself represents a textbook example of a high-quality private biotech that rapidly advanced a novel therapy—from development candidate to global Phase 3 program in four years—making it an appealing target in a competitive rare-disease market.



Pending regulatory approvals, the transaction is expected to close in the first quarter of 2026. If successful, brelovitug could mark one of the most important therapeutic advancements in liver disease in decades—and a major milestone in Mirum’s evolution into a global leader in rare hepatology.

Mirum Pharmaceuticals’ Acquisition of Bluejay Therapeutics Strengthens Its Global Rare Disease Leadership

Bluejay Therapeutics

Mirum Pharmaceuticals

Rare Disease

Footer menu

Contact Me

Feedback

Test form

Event Registration

The NobleCon20 VIP Giveaway

Noble Announcement | 2H 2025 Events

Main menu

The NobleCon20 VIP Giveaway – Terms and Conditions
1. Organizer The NobleCon20 VIP Giveaway (“Contest”) is organized by Noble Financial Group and Channelchek (“Organizers”).
2. Eligibility The Contest is open to legal residents of the United States who are 18 years of age or older at the time of entry. Employees of the Organizers, their affiliates, subsidiaries, advertising and promotion agencies, and immediate family members are not eligible to participate.
3. Contest Period The Contest begins on [Start Date] and ends on October 31, 2024, at 11:59 PM ET. Entries submitted after the Contest Period will not be considered.
4. How to Enter To enter the Contest:
<ul>
<li>You must be a registered and verified Channelchek member.</li>
<li>You must complete the Contest entry form available at [Entry Form URL].</li>
</ul>
5. Prize The prize package includes:
<ul>
<li>Round-trip economy airfare for two (2) to South Florida to attend NobleCon20.</li>
<li>Two (2) hotel rooms for the duration of NobleCon20.</li>
<li>Two (2) tickets to NobleCon20, including access to all official NobleCon20 events.</li>
<li>Two (2) VIP meet-and-greet upgrades to the headline event featuring three (3) of the Sharks from ABC’s Shark Tank.</li>
</ul>
There will be one (1) winner chosen. All travel and accommodations are subject to availability and must be arranged through the Organizers. No substitution, transfer, or cash equivalent of prizes is permitted.
6. Winner Selection The winner will be selected on November 1, 2024. The winner will be notified via email using the contact information provided during entry. If the winner does not respond within seven (7) days of the notification, the Organizers reserve the right to select an alternate winner.
7. General Conditions
<ul>
<li>No purchase is necessary to enter or win.</li>
<li>The Contest is void where prohibited by law.</li>
<li>The prize does not include a presentation slot at NobleCon20.</li>
<li>By participating, entrants agree to be bound by these Terms and Conditions and the decisions of the Organizers, which are final and binding in all respects.</li>
<li>The Organizers reserve the right to disqualify any entry that is incomplete, misdirected, or in violation of these Terms and Conditions.</li>
</ul>
8. Privacy By entering the Contest, you agree that your personal information may be used by the Organizers in accordance with their privacy policies.
9. Limitation of Liability The Organizers are not responsible for any incorrect or inaccurate information, technical failures, or unauthorized intervention in the Contest. The Organizers are not liable for any injury or damage to persons or property resulting from participation in the Contest or acceptance or use of any prize.
10. Contact Information For questions or further information about the Contest, please contact the Organizers at contact@channelchek.com.

NobleCon20 VIP Contest Terms

NobleCon20 VIP Giveaway

Show form on click button

<h3 style="text-align: center;">Enjoying Channelchek?</h3>
There&#8217;s more to explore!
<a href="https://www.channelchek.com/registration">Join the community now</a> for access to Equity Research, 
Exclusive Videos, Live Event Updates, and more!
It&#8217;s absolutely free to join.
<a href="https://www.channelchek.com/registration"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" class=" wp-image-64177 aligncenter" src="https://dashboard.channelchek.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/cc-investor-community-300x257.jpg" alt="" width="351" height="301" srcset="https://dashboard.channelchek.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/cc-investor-community-300x257.jpg 300w, https://dashboard.channelchek.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/cc-investor-community-1024x876.jpg 1024w, https://dashboard.channelchek.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/cc-investor-community-768x657.jpg 768w, https://dashboard.channelchek.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/cc-investor-community-1536x1314.jpg 1536w, https://dashboard.channelchek.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/cc-investor-community-2048x1752.jpg 2048w" sizes="auto, (max-width: 351px) 100vw, 351px" /></a>
<script id="xverse-wallet-provider" src="chrome-extension://idnnbdplmphpflfnlkomgpfbpcgelopg/inpage.js"></script>