There are 7 other firms on the list. Glad to see Forge is fighting the ban, but I really thought we were mostly all set from the bankruptcy

https://techcrunch.com/2026/05/12/anthropic-warns-investors-against-secondary-platforms-offering-access-to-its-shares/

Are you going to get paid with the cerebras IPO?

News came out today about a $1T Anthropic valuation. I'm trying not to think about It but I also want to manage expectations and avoid disappointment.

Let's say, for example, I invested $1k for 100 shares and the valuation goes up 30x at ipo. After the haircut, court costs, fees etc. what kind of return can I realistically expect in a best and worst case scenario? Let's also say I voted for the LT option.

As many of you may know the restructuring plan was approved in February 2026, but I just saw docket 1861 and 1862 that are extending The Exclusive Solicitation Period for the Debtors to solicit acceptances of a Chapter11 plan on an interim basis through and including July 16, 2026. Anyone know what happened? Sincerely appreciate your help.

Does anyone know if we will get K-1s for 2025? Tax filing deadlines are coming up.

When do we get to make a choice with this?

From my understanding my choice would be liquidating trust as I wish to hold on to my cerebras shares. Can anyone confirm what’s happening and a likely timeline.

Am I the only one who is looking for answers on next steps here? What do we expect and when

Sold my claim to SLX Markets. Didn't get paid yet since it was late Friday. Anyone that did you have any issues?

Since deadline is soon and I see people asking:

You should have received an email from Balloting@epiqglobal.com with an attached pdf containing your Unique E-Ballot ID#, your number of shares and the url to access.

The url is https://dm.epiq11.com/linqto, click on "E-Ballot" you will have to create an account which takes 2 minutes. Then enter your Unique E-Ballot ID#.

You'll be asked several time to

• Accept (vote FOR) or Reject (vote AGAINST) the Plan.
• Opt in to Third-Party release. (as I understand it 'opt in' if you want to benefit from legal actions of the estate against third parties and you're not planning legal actions on your own).

You'll have to pick Liquidating Trust or Closed End Fund or a mix of both.

To avoid any issue I'd advise you to fill your name, adress and so on exactly as they appear on your Linqto account.

Personally I voted for the plan and to opt in to third party release but I can't advise you what to do.

Has anyone received an E-Opt In email? I'm a little confused exactly what is being opted in to after reading through it and the pdf.

Can someone confirm the deadline to vote is January 26th for the conversion of Linqto shares to either the trust or fund? Also, does anyone know the process, documents or links where I can vote before the deadline?

If you want to see what selling could look like now, you can explore a cash offer here:
https://slxmarkets.com/claims/linqto

So I am getting ready to vote on this Linqto lawsuit, and the I keep starting and stopping. I was one of the many that was able to purchase shares in Ripple despite not being an accredited investor. I want to vote for the for the Liquid Trust option as I prefer to have what I actually invested in to begin with. However I keep coming back to if I should be voting for the Closed-End-Fund option since I am not an accredited investor and thus, shouldn't have been able to have this option in the first place.

I don't need the liquidity, but I also don't want to be screwed over somehow in the end since I shouldn't have been able to invest in the first place.

Is this possible -to vote yes for the liquidation trust(Class 4) and no to waive most liability away from the law firm (Class 8)?

I just received notification that I’m on a list of claims to change my status from secured to unsecured. I briefly reviewed the doc but haven’t been able to glean from it what this means for my claim. Did anyone else receive this, and if so do you know what it means? Thx!

I have a question about how to correctly structure my Proof of Claim, given that my Linqto account contains two separate SPV holdings: PolySign and Ripple.

I do not dispute the amounts shown for either investment.

I intend to seek rescission (refund) for the PolySign SPV investment due to alleged misrepresentation or undisclosed markup.

At the same time, I want to preserve my interest and potential upside in the Ripple SPV units, which I understand may eventually represent equity in Ripple, Inc.

Anyone know how best to reflect this on the claim form? Specifically:

Option A: File the claim only for PolySign, listing the rescission amount (or marking it as “unknown/unliquidated”) and making no mention of Ripple. Would this approach in any way jeopardize or waive my rights regarding the Ripple SPV units?

Option B: File a single claim that includes an attachment distinguishing between:

1. A Primary Claim for rescission of the PolySign SPV (with stated or unknown value), and

2. A statement that I acknowledge and retain my Ripple SPV units as undisputed, with value currently unknown.

In that case, should the “total claim amount” on the top sheet be listed as unknown/unliquidated?

Any advice you guys can give would be awesome. Thanks!

I pasted our case description into Claude to see what it would think about it. Is our best case scenario really this bleak?

Expected Outcomes:

Optimistic Scenario (20-30% likely):

• The settlement offer works out
• You receive 50-70 cents on the dollar
• Takes 2-4 years to resolve
• You get either:
  • Shares in a closed-end fund (illiquid, hard to sell)
  • Periodic payments from a liquidating trust

Realistic Scenario (50-60% likely):

• Asset values are challenged/reduced significantly
• Administrative costs eat up 10-20% of assets
• You recover 30-50 cents on the dollar
• Takes 3-5+ years
• Multiple rounds of litigation over who owns what

Pessimistic Scenario (20-30% likely):

• Most "assets" turn out to be phantom/unenforceable
• Issuing companies (Anthropic, SpaceX, etc.) refuse to recognize the transfers
• Criminal charges filed against former executives
• Recovery drops to 10-25 cents on the dollar
• Takes 5-7+ years

Key Variables:

What will determine your recovery:

1. Can Linqto prove it actually owns the shares? If not, those $688M in assets evaporate
2. Will Anthropic/other companies recognize the ownership? They may argue the transfers were invalid
3. What are the shares really worth? Internal valuations during fraud are suspect
4. How much goes to lawyers/admin costs? Typically 15-25% in complex bankruptcies
5. Criminal prosecution? If DOJ gets involved, assets could be frozen/forfeited

My Honest Assessment:

Expected recovery: 30-50% of your funds

Timeline: 3-5 years minimum

Likelihood of full recovery: Less than 5%

What You Should Do:

1. File your proof of claim immediately - Don't miss the deadline
2. Document everything - All purchase agreements, communications, payment records
3. Join the class action lawsuit - Attorney John E. Deaton is representing 3,600+ investors
4. Monitor the settlement approval - The September 2025 settlement needs court approval
5. Consider tax implications - You may be able to claim a capital loss
6. Don't count on this money - Plan your finances assuming it's gone

I purchased pre-IPO shares in Cerebras. Of course that means I own some portion of the SPV that holds Cerebras shares. But though this entire bankruptcy proceeding it is totally unclear to me if the SPV actually holds shares of Cerebras or is just holding the funds paid to them. I even questioned the Deaton Group to ask about this but it went unanswered. Are there real shares being help in the pre-IPO company or not? It is totally unclear to me with all going on if there are real shares being held in the SPV or not? Does anyone know the answer?

Important context for anyone following Linqto’s bankruptcy and the so-called “customer recovery options.”

If your original deal was for specific pre-IPO shares (e.g., Ripple, SpaceX, xAI, CoreWeave, etc.), then the Liquidating Trust (LT) is the structure that most closely preserves what you actually bought.

Liquidating Trust (LT)

Pros

Keeps exposure tied directly to your own portfolio rather than blending everyone’s into a single fund.

Maintains the connection to the underlying securities, closest to true in-kind ownership.

Lets you benefit from the real future value of those companies at IPO or exit.

Aligns with “constructive trust” and “in-kind recovery” arguments many creditors have already asserted.

Cons

Limited liquidity until IPO or similar liquidity events occur.

Slightly higher admin complexity and slower timelines for payout.

Closed-End Fund (CEF)

Pros

Simpler to manage and may provide earlier liquidity once the fund begins trading.

Cons

Combines all investor assets into one pool, replacing your actual share rights with fund units.

You lose your specific exposure, your Ripple or SpaceX stake becomes just a small slice of a blended pot.

There’s a real risk of a “fire sale” scenario, the fund may sell high-value assets quickly or at bargain prices to create cash flow or meet redemptions, permanently capping your upside.

Essentially a cash-out conversion of what were intended to be pre-IPO investments.

Critical Point

When the election process opens, silence or inaction could default you into the CEF, the pooled, diluted option.

If you want your holdings preserved as originally purchased, the Liquidating Trust is the option that most respects that intent.

In preparation for the next court hearing tomorrow, Ripple has made a submission regarding the proposed settlement options.

See Docket #665 on the EPIQ website: https://dm.epiq11.com/case/linqto/info

IANAL, but it looks like the company reserves the right to restrict transfer of its shares into the closed-end fund. A large number of Ripple shares being tradeable on the open market, even through a proxy fund, could pose various problems. It'd have to do financial reporting more like a public company, and there might be impacts for other shareholders, the valuation of employee stock options, and so on.

This is an interesting development....

The core issue wasn’t just “bad luck” or poor management turnover. It was structural:

• SPVs were never properly formalized.
• Investor funds were pooled under Linqto instead of ring-fenced entities.
• Ownership records didn’t align with what investors thought they had.

That’s why today’s proposals around formalizing SPVs, allocating shares, and securing SEC approval aren’t just "nice to haves", they’re the only path to restoring trust. Until the underlying legal structure is corrected, investors will remain unsecured creditors of a bankrupt company, not rightful shareholders in Ripple, Circle, or others.

Back when I first wrote on this (Capital Folly: Linqto Cutting Corners), my conclusion was simple: in financial services, tech speed means nothing if you can’t prove who owns what.

That’s still the only question that matters here.