$APP @FuzzyPandaShort Let's be precise about what happened today. San Diego County, not a state, filed a civil complaint in state court. It's allegations. Nothing has been tested in court yet. Explicit ads reaching kids is serious, and if the county proves it, APP should pay and fix it. Nobody serious defends that. But "multiple state AGs" has been "coming" for a year. In Oct 2025 the NY Post said staff from the Delaware, Oregon and Connecticut AGs were calling short sellers. A year later I haven't seen a single state AG lawsuit, and APP said at the time it hadn't even been contacted. The SEC probe was reported Oct 2025 and confirmed "active" in Feb 2026. No charges or settlement have been disclosed. Size it correctly too. California's unfair competition law allows penalties of up to $2,500 per violation. That can be real money, but these cases usually end in a settlement and compliance changes. And even if AGs pile on: 40+ states sued Meta in 2023 over harm to kids, and Meta kept compounding. Now "we warned you." Your Feb 2025 report is 20 months old, so we can now go through your statement and see if they even came to fruition. Your thesis was that APP's growth was "built on ad fraud," Meta's stolen data and silent "direct downloads." If that were true, the numbers should have broken. They didn't, and this is audited cash, not adjusted fluff: FY25 revenue: $5.5B (+70%) Q2 26 revenue: $1.92B (+53%) Q2 26 GAAP net income: $1.27B TTM FCF: $4.5B, with ~$2.5B spent on buybacks "Direct Download = top revenue driver" APP shut Array down in Q2 2025, and T-Mobile and Samsung both ended their partnerships. If your "top revenue driver" got killed, revenue should have cratered. Instead FY25 grew 70% and Q2 26 grew 53%, with net revenue per install up 58%. "Stealing Meta's data" / "Meta will shut it down" 20 months later there has been no public Meta cutoff or action. Meanwhile APP's consumer advertiser spend hit a record in Q2 26, 28% above the Q4 25 holiday peak, and Store Leads data via Citi counts ~14,600 e-com accounts on AppLovin Ads. If APP were just copying Meta's homework, Meta could have ended it with a config change. It didn't. And on MAX "seeing Meta's bids": Adam has said MAX only uses the standard win/loss notifications every bidder gets, and that bid-stream data is kept separate and purged after seven days. If you have evidence otherwise, post it. Your 12.78 std dev "study" came from an unnamed expert, and nobody outside can check it. Two ad platforms trying to find people who buy the same wallet will correlate. That's two models doing their job, not theft. And Ridge is an AppLovin Ads advertiser. You visited ridge.com and then saw Ridge ads. Ridge knows who visits its own site. The simplest explanation is retargeting, not Meta. "Ad fraud" / ads that click themselves APP's advertisers are performance buyers who measure installs against downstream revenue through their own measurement partners. Junk installs don't pay back, and ROAS-driven budgets get cut. Instead advertisers kept scaling: Tenjin Q2 26 has APP's ad revenue share rising 39%→44% on iOS and 19%→23% on Android. Fraud doesn't compound for three years under that kind of measurement. And Ben Edelman, your outside expert, has disclosed a short position in APP. (1/2)