GameStop’s Plan to Raise Another $1.75B Fuels Speculation of Further Bitcoin Acquisitions

Cryptocurrency

Stocks

Summary:

The zero-coupon notes will be offered to qualified institutional buyers under Rule 144A of the Securities Act, with an option for initial purchasers to buy an additional $250 million within 13 days of issuance.

GameStop Corp. plans to raise $1.75 billion through a private offering of convertible senior notes due 2032, as the company explores digital asset investments, including potential Bitcoin acquisitions, under its updated investment strategy, according to a June 11 press release.

The unsecured notes will not bear interest, will not accrete, and will mature on June 15, 2032, unless converted, redeemed, or repurchased earlier.

GameStop said it may settle conversions in cash, stock, or a combination. The conversion rate and other final terms will be determined at the time of pricing.

Bitcoin treasury accumulation

While GameStop did not disclose specific investment targets, it stated that proceeds will be used for “general corporate purposes,” including acquisitions and investments aligned with its Investment Policy, which permits the company to allocate capital to Bitcoinand other blockchain-based assets.

The move echoes similar strategies by companies such as MicroStrategy, which used convertible debt to amass over 200,000 BTC, turning the cryptocurrency into a strategic treasury reserve.

Market speculation around GameStop’s potential Bitcoin exposure has grown in recent weeks, particularly after executive reshuffles and broader engagement with the digital asset space.

The firm previously raised $1.3 billion through another convertible note offering, which led to an acquisition of 4,710 BTC for its treasury last month.

GameStop has previously hinted at ambitions beyond retail gaming, exploring digital wallets, NFTs, and decentralized infrastructure. This latest financing round could give the company additional flexibility to pursue a more aggressive pivot toward blockchain-related assets or technologies.

Limiting immediate dilution

The offering allows GameStop to raise capital without immediate shareholder dilution. However, future conversions of the notes into equity could increase the outstanding share count.

The company retains the flexibility to settle in cash, which may limit dilution depending on stock performance at the time of conversion.

The notes and any shares issuable upon conversion will not be registered under federal securities laws and may not be publicly offered or sold in the US without an exemption.

GameStop shares slipped slightly in after-hours trading following the announcement, indicating that investors remain skeptical of its investment plans for now.

Source: Cryptoslate

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

You understand and acknowledge that there is a high degree of risk involved in trading. Following any strategies or investment methods may lead to potential losses. The content on the site is provided by our contributors and analysts for information purposes only. You are solely responsible for determining whether any trading assets, securities, strategy, or any other product is suitable for investing based on your own investment objectives and financial situation.

Add to Favorites

Manuel

Commodity

Energy

Oil prices rose as a U.S.-China trade deal and soft inflation report boosted demand expectations while concerns about political instability in the Middle East sparked fears of supply disruptions.

West Texas Intermediate futures contracts, the U.S. crude oil benchmark, rose as much as 5.2% on Wednesday to trade above $68 a barrel for the first time since April 2, when President Trump’s "Liberation Day” tariff announcement pulled prices lower.

Prices surged in afternoon trading amid reports that the State Department had ordered the departure of all nonessential personnel at the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad to address security concerns amid mounting tensions in the Middle East.

Oil prices had risen earlier in the session after the U.S. and China agreed to a trade deal that eased fears about the economic fallout of a protracted trade war between the world’s two largest economies. A soft inflation report added to Wall Street's optimism about demand.

The energy sector led stock market gainers on Wednesday. Oil companies were up, with Occidental Petroleum (OXY) gaining 2% and ConocoPhillips (COP) both finishing up more than 2%. Read Investopedia's full coverage of today's trading here.

Crude oil prices slumped to about $57 per barrel in early May, their lowest level since early 2021, after the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries and its allies agreed to boost production in June. Energy markets were on edge even before OPEC announced the supply increase: U.S.-China trade had effectively come to a standstill after the countries increased tariff rates on each other’s goods to more than 100%, threatening to slow global growth and weigh on oil demand.

Prices began to rebound in mid-May after the U.S. and U.K. agreed to a trade deal framework, giving Wall Street confidence that tariff rates would eventually settle below the levels announced in April. Oil's rebound picked up pace in early June when OPEC lifted its production targets by less than investors expected.

Source: Reuters

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

Add to Favorites

Manuel

Commodity

Energy

JERA, Japan's biggest power generator, has agreed to new supply deals for U.S. liquefied natural gas (LNG) from four projects to diversify its global portfolio away from its reliance on Australia, it said on Thursday.

JERA plans to buy up to 5.5 million metric tons per annum (mtpa) of U.S. LNG under 20-year contracts, with deliveries starting around 2030. That total includes some previously reported deals as well as newly announced agreements.

The move illustrates Japan's efforts to seek stable and flexible LNG supply to strengthen energy security and meet growing electricity demand driven by expanding data centres. The country is the world's second-largest LNG importer after China.

JERA, Japan's biggest LNG buyer, has signed a heads of agreement with Sempra Infrastructure for 1.5 mtpa from its Port Arthur LNG phase 2 project and a HOA with Cheniere Marketing for up to 1 mtpa from Corpus Christi LNG and Sabine Pass LNG.

The Japanese utility also signed a 20-year sales and purchase agreement (SPA) with U.S. LNG developer Commonwealth LNG for 1 mtpa from its Louisiana project. On Tuesday, sources familiar with the negotiations told Reuters about the deal though both companies declined to comment at the time.

The 5.5 mtpa figure also includes its deal announced on May 29 with NextDecade to buy 2 mtpa from its Rio Grande LNG project.

All four are 20-year, free-on-board contracts with no destination restrictions, although the Cheniere deal could go beyond 20 years, JERA said.

"We made these decisions because cost-competitive and flexible LNG is essential as we look towards the 2030s," JERA's Global CEO and Chair Yukio Kani told Reuters.

He added that LNG has become increasingly important amid rising power demand from data centres and the soaring costs of cleaner alternatives like hydrogen and ammonia.

"We were also aiming to secure contracts with the projects already under development and tied to the EPC (engineering, procurement, and construction) agreements before the recent surge in LNG project costs and interest rates," he said.

The announcement comes amid ongoing trade talks between Japan and the United States, though Kani stressed there was no government pressure behind the deals which he said were purely private sector decisions.

"We are rebalancing towards the global supply mix," he said, to reduce its weighting toward Australia.

After the new deals, the U.S. will supply nearly 30% of JERA's LNG mix, up from 10% now. Oceania and Asia, including Australia, currently account for more than half.

JERA, jointly owned by Tokyo Electric Power and Chubu Electric Power, already buys U.S. supply from Freeport LNG and Cameron LNG. In 2023, it signed a 20-year contract to buy 1 mtpa from Venture Global's CP2 project.

Source: Reuters

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

Add to Favorites

Manuel

China–U.S. Trade War

Economic

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told Congress that it is "highly likely" that a pause related to steep new US tariffs on other countries will be extended for countries that are negotiating with the administration "in good faith."

"There are 18 important trading partners — we are working toward deals on those — and it is highly likely that those countries that are ... negotiating in good faith, we will roll the date forward," Bessent said during testimony before the House Ways and Means Committee.

On April 9, after President Trump's announcement of steep new tariffs across global trading partners roiled markets, Trump imposed a 90-day pause on the import taxes. The US continues to negotiate new trade deals with various countries, as well as the European Union.

Earlier on Wednesday, US and China agreed to a framework and implementation plan to ease tariff and trade tensions on Tuesday. President Trump signaled his approval, saying the deal was "done" pending sign-off from him and Chinese President Xi Jinping.

Trump and other US officials indicated the deal should resolve issues between the two countries on rare earths and magnets, though reports later indicated China would only loosen restrictions on rare earth mineral exports for a six-month period. Trump also said the US will allow Chinese students in US colleges, a sticking point that had emerged in the weeks following the countries' mid-May deal in Geneva.

Trump said the US would impose a total of 55% tariffs on Chinese goods. Yahoo Finance's Ben Werschkul reports, citing a White House official, that Trump arrived at that figure by adding together an array of preexisting duties and not any new tariffs.

Meanwhile, though Trump's most sweeping tariffs continue to face legal uncertainty, on Tuesday, the president received a favorable update. A federal appeals court held a decision saying his tariffs can temporarily stay in effect. The US Court of International Trade had blocked their implementation last month, deeming the method used to enact them "unlawful."

Source: Reuters

To stay updated on all economic events of today, please check out our Economic calendar

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

Add to Favorites

Manuel

Political

Economic

Headline inflation was up a scant 0.1% month over month (m/m), below consensus expectations of a 0.2% m/m rise. On a yearly basis (y/y), the consumer price index rose 2.4% — very near the Federal Reserve’s ultimate target of 2% y/y price growth.

Core inflation, which removes items with volatile pricing like food and energy, was also up 0.1% m/m. In a Bloomberg survey of 73 economists, not one forecast a core reading as low as 0.1%.

Not-so-great expectations

What, in fact, did economists expect from this print?

In a note from June 5, Bank of America predicted that “tariffs should have a broader impact on the data” than in April, and expected “to see more signs of tariffs driving prices higher” in May.

Nor were they alone in this call.

Forecasts for tariff-driven price increases were practically unanimous: Economists surveyed by Reuters bet that a rise in core inflation “would be attributable to higher prices from President Donald Trump’s sweeping import duties,” and that “May would mark the start of tariff-related high inflation readings that could last through year-end.”

Indeed, low-cost retail behemoth Walmart shocked markets by announcing that it would begin raising prices in May, citing higher tariffs. “The magnitude and speed at which these prices are coming to us is somewhat unprecedented in history,” stated John David Rainey, chief financial officer at Walmart, in a mid-May interview.

While this move could be interpreted cynically as “greedflation,” in which companies hide behind an inflationary environment to justify price increases that aim to boost — rather than simply protect — margins, it is unlikely that Walmart’s price hike was so motivated. The retailer has gained market share in recent years specifically due to its status as a low-cost alternative to other big-box stores.

What was worrisome, however, was the potential cover that Walmart would give its competitors. “If Walmart is doing it, everybody else is probably going to be doing it — if not already, they will be in the future,” argued UBS economist Alan Detmeister.

May’s inflation data, then, was set to be the first real test of how consumer prices would be impacted by historically high tariffs.

“Retailers showed remarkable restraint in April,” said Stephen Stanley, chief U.S. economist at Santander U.S. Capital Markets, yesterday. “May should bring the leading edge of price increases, with the maximum impact coming in June and July.”

On June 3, Chicago Fed President Austan Goolsbee warned that April’s soft inflation reading would likely be the “last vestige” of pre-tariff price data and that the impact of tariffs “would start showing up very soon.”

He who hesitates is lost

Even though Goolsbee so confidently assumed that tariffs would have an inflationary impact — thus prompting the Fed to further delay additional interest-rate cuts — the Fed as a whole is not convinced.

Minneapolis Fed President Neel Kashkari revealed that there was a “healthy debate” among Fed officials about whether to “look through” the inflationary effect of these historic tariffs, treating any related price growth as a one-time shock and therefore prioritizing economic growth by cutting rates. This view is best represented by Fed Governor Christopher Waller, who reaffirmed a path to further rate cuts in 2025 earlier this month.

Others, like Goolsbee and Kashkari, are less convinced that tariffs will only have a transitory influence on consumer prices. This camp is thus more comfortable maintaining the current “wait-and-see” approach to quantitative easing, citing the surprisingly strong labor market as justification for withholding cuts.

But there is a third alternative, albeit one that is somewhat of a dark horse in influencing future policy.

This group argues that the Fed’s response, far from raising rates to combat tariff-induced inflation or even looking through the tariffs and not adjusting current policy, should in fact be expansionary.

This third view, outlined in Javier Bianchi and Louphou Coulibaly’s working paper, “The Optimal Monetary Policy Response to Tariffs,” concedes that tariffs will lead to a substantial price increase.

The issue, however, is that consumers will fail to realise that tariffs generate revenue for the government, which (all else being equal) raises household income. Equipped with a higher income, households could largely shrug off higher prices.

Given this disconnect between how consumers would ideally respond to tariffs and how they likely will, which is by reducing consumption, Bianchi and Coulibaly argue that the Fed should be prepared to tolerate higher inflation in order to stimulate employment.

Crucially, it is not just finished goods that are impacted by tariffs; some intermediate inputs necessary for domestic manufacturing cannot be domestically sourced and so must be imported.

The real threat is that domestic production and employment would suffer if not bolstered by lower interest rates: U.S. companies are constantly expressing their unwillingness to invest in the current restrictive policy environment, making this point a no-brainer.

The authors argue that their course, under which the Fed should give more weight to maximizing employment than to stabilizing prices, is optimal. Since there have yet to be signs of broad, tariff-driven inflation, cutting interest rates sooner rather than later seems like the obvious thing for the Fed to do.

Although no cuts are expected at next week’s meeting, markets are betting that the Fed will cut in September. Prior to May’s inflation data, traders had priced in a 57% chance of such a cut. At the time of writing, this probability has jumped to 68%.

Source: Freightwaves

To stay updated on all economic events of today, please check out our Economic calendar

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

Add to Favorites

Owen Li

Economic

Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick said Wednesday that U.S. tariff levels on Chinese imports will not change from their current levels, even as a trade deal between Washington and Beijing has yet to be finalized.

Asked on CNBC’s “Money Movers” if the current U.S. tariffs on China are not going to change again, Lutnick replied, “You can definitely say that.”

President Donald Trump said in a Truth Social post Wednesday morning that U.S. duties on China will total 55% — but a White House official told CNBC soon after that that figure is not new.

Rather, it comprises the existing 30% blanket U.S. tariffs on China, plus the 25% tariffs on specific products that also were already in place, the official said.

Trump sent his all-caps post hours after Lutnick and other trade negotiators for the two economic superpowers concluded high-level talks in London.

The president said the deal is “done,” but added that it is still “subject to final approval” between himself and Chinese President Xi Jinping.

Trump said China’s tariffs on the U.S. will stay at 10%, where they have stood since both sides agreed last month to temporarily pare back retaliatory duties on each others’ goods.

That 90-day reprieve came after initial talks in Geneva, Switzerland, that yielded a tentative de-escalation on tariffs but left other key sticking points unresolved, including on key minerals known as rare earths.

Trump in Wednesday’s post also wrote that “full magnets any necessary rare earths, will be supplied, up front, by China” as a result of the London talks.

In a follow-up, he wrote, “President XI and I are going to work closely together to open up China to American Trade.”

Source:CNBC

To stay updated on all economic events of today, please check out our Economic calendar

Risk Warnings and Disclaimers

Add to Favorites

Adam

Economic

China–U.S. Trade War

The US and China ended two days of talks in London with the announcement of a new effort to try and move past recent flare-ups and get back to negotiations that had been planned after a gathering last month in Geneva.

Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick described the agreement to reporters as "a framework to implement the Geneva consensus" — suggesting this gathering was about getting the "negativity out." The Chinese negotiator offered similar takeaways to Chinese state media.

The sides hinted that this week's talks will lead to a Chinese speed-up of shipments of rare earth metals critical to US and world supply chains in exchange for Washington easing some of its own export controls on things like semiconductors.

The clear focus for the moment is defusing these issues with an eye toward opening up talks on broader topics — like tariffs — later.

The deals will now be presented to US President Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping for their reaction.

Trump offered his own reaction Wednesday morning with a social media post asserting that a deal is "done" and will include the supplying of rare earth minerals by China “up front” as well as give Chinese students access to US universities.

Trump also said, “WE ARE GETTING A TOTAL OF 55% TARIFFS.”

He arrived at that figure, according to a White House official, by adding together an array of preexisting duties and not any new tariffs. The president combined the existing 20% tariffs over illegal drugs and migration with 10% "Liberation Day" tariffs, with other sector-specific duties in place that average out to 25% but only apply to certain goods.

Outside analysts, such as the budget lab at Yale, have calculated that the effective tariff rate on China overall is more like 33%.

A variety of market observers quickly weighed in hours after Tuesday evening’s unveiling to suggest that the deal may not have a lot of meat on the bones, but at least relations are no longer moving in the wrong direction.

he talks perhaps underscored how unlikely a comprehensive trade deal is anytime soon, noted AGF Investments' Greg Valliere, "but at least relations may not worsen as talks continue throughout the summer."

Both sides promised additional talks in the weeks or months ahead, but none have yet been scheduled.

Veronique de Rugy, a professor at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University, suggested the talks continued to show China's leverage: "China is hurting, yes, but they still hold the upper hand on critical resources, and they know how to use them."

Any lessening of tensions and a freer flow of these mineral resources in China would be a significant boost to the global economy, with China holding outsized leverage in both the reserves and processing capacity of these key building blocks for everything from computers to electric vehicle batteries to medical devices.

Likewise, the US offering concessions on export controls would be a significant move after years where successive US administrations have wielded these controls — especially around the design and manufacture of semiconductors — by saying they need to be tight on China for national security reasons.

Any significant US move to relent on export controls would be "an unprecedented action," Wendy Cutler, a former senior US trade negotiator who is now at the Asia Society Policy Institute, wrote on LinkedIn.

The president did not address the export control issue in his Wednesday morning post.

But overall, Henrietta Treyz of Veda Partners described the rare earths and semiconductor talks as, perhaps for broader markets, "extraneous" to the larger issue of tariffs in the months ahead, noting "no tariffs have come off or are likely to come off in our view."

The May agreement in Geneva dropped American tariffs on Chinese goods from 145% to 30% and also slashed China's retaliatory duties from 125% to 10%.

But that pause is in effect for 90 days, leaving the US and China about two months to try and tackle those issues.

Before the talks concluded, Shehzad Qazi of the China Beige Book offered in a Yahoo Finance interview that any agreement would be a "shaky truce at best."

Terry Haines of Pangaea Policy summed things up for markets, calling this week's agreement "tiny." But Haines suggested any optimism could be short-lived, predicting an "ephemeral markets positive as its very limited scope and unfinished status sinks in."

Markets have "seen the patch-up movie many times," he added.