If you are an investor relations executive at Google's parent company Alphabet, Meta, or Amazon, consider this strategy: Hang a large portrait of SoftBank CEO Masayoshi Son on your office wall. The next time an investor complains about your company's spending on artificial intelligence, simply point to the photo, and the argument will likely end. While big tech firms continue to ramp up AI investments, most of their funding is supported by operating cash flow. SoftBank is different: it has spent a total of $54.6 billion acquiring OpenAI shares, funded through a combination of loans and asset sales. Now, SoftBank has taken its financing leverage a step further: on Thursday, it disclosed that it had completed a $10 billion loan this week, secured by its OpenAI stake. SoftBank has committed to investing an additional $10 billion in OpenAI in October, which will likely be financed by pledging more OpenAI shares. The risks of borrowing against OpenAI equity are clear. SoftBank's disclosure shows that the new loan, finalized on Wednesday, includes a clause requiring it to post additional collateral if the fair value of OpenAI shares drops significantly. It is easy to imagine a risky scenario: if OpenAI's business growth slows and its valuation falls, banks will demand more funds from SoftBank; SoftBank might be forced to sell some OpenAI shares to raise cash, further depressing OpenAI's valuation, creating a vicious cycle. Of course, an extreme outcome may not occur. SoftBank has other ways to raise cash if needed, and the probability of OpenAI's share price falling enough to trigger a margin call is low. SoftBank estimates that as of June 30, its OpenAI stake had an unrealized gain of $45 billion, providing a substantial buffer against volatility. Even so, there are precedents for tech company valuations soaring and then crashing sharply. Masayoshi Son has always been willing to take high risks, but this move may be stretching leverage to its limits. Is this the status quo that California and several Democratic-led states are trying to preserve? Multiple state governments are attempting to block Warner Bros. Discovery (WBD) from being acquired by Paramount-Skydance; meanwhile, Warner Bros. Discovery reported on Thursday that its second-quarter revenue fell 11% and profits also declined. The earnings report shows that Warner Bros. Discovery's streaming business grew, but not enough to offset the revenue decline from its cable TV channels and film production operations. One major reason for the revenue drop: the loss of NBA broadcast rights for its cable channels due to rising transmission costs. In other words, Warner Bros. Discovery lacks the scale to compete with giants like Netflix and Amazon Prime Video, and a merger with Paramount might change that. But the states want to maintain the current industry structure. In their lawsuit, the states argue that if two of Hollywood's top five film studios and top five cable channel operators merge, it would harm theaters, the cable TV industry, and consumers. The state attorneys general who filed the lawsuit seem to be riding a time machine set to the 1990s—an era when Netflix, Amazon Prime Video, and Apple TV+ did not exist, and cable TV was the main way people watched video. The states have obtained a temporary court order blocking the merger until the trial concludes, which is set for March next year. The direction of events is clear. If the deal is frozen for another six to nine months, it will only further weaken Warner Bros. Discovery's competitiveness. Over the past year, management has focused most of its energy on selling the company rather than competing with rivals. If the merger is ultimately rejected, both Paramount and Warner Bros. Discovery will suffer heavy losses. The states' attempt to swim against the current may only accelerate the decline of these old Hollywood giants.