Get ONMINE

Stay Ahead, Stay ONMINE

Musk v. Altman week 2: OpenAI fires back, and Shivon Zilis reveals that Musk tried to poach Sam Altman

In the second week of the landmark trial between Elon Musk and OpenAI, Musk’s motivations for bringing the suit were under scrutiny. Last week, Musk took the stand, alleging that OpenAI CEO Sam Altman and president Greg Brockman had deceived him into donating $38 million to the company. He claimed that they’d promised to maintain it as a nonprofit dedicated to developing AI for the benefit of humanity, only to later accept billions of dollars of investment from Microsoft and restructure the company to operate a for-profit subsidiary.   This week, Brockman fired back with his side of the story, arguing that Musk had actually pushed for OpenAI to create a for-profit arm and fought a bitter battle to have “absolute control” over it. OpenAI has argued that Musk is suing because he didn’t get his way and is now trying to undermine a competitor to his own AI company, xAI. Shivon Zilis, a former OpenAI board member and the mother of four of Musk’s children, also testified, revealing that Musk tried to recruit OpenAI CEO Sam Altman to lead a new AI lab at his electric-car company, Tesla.  Musk cofounded OpenAI in 2015 with Altman, Brockman, and others but left in 2018. Now, he’s asking the court to remove Altman and Brockman from their roles and to unwind the restructuring OpenAI undertook last year, which converted its for-profit subsidiary into a public benefit corporation. He is also seeking as much as $134 billion in damages from OpenAI and Microsoft, OpenAI’s investor.  The outcome of the trial could upend OpenAI’s race toward an IPO at a valuation approaching $1 trillion. Meanwhile, xAI, which Musk founded in 2023, is now a division of his rocket company, SpaceX; the combined companies are also expected to go public as early as June, at a target valuation of $1.75 trillion. On Monday, Brockman walked into the courtroom in a blue suit and tie, holding hands with his wife, Anna Brockman. On the stand, he was serene, even chipper, as he recalled OpenAI’s early days. But he grew agitated under impassioned questioning from Elon Musk’s lawyer, Steven Molo. Altman listened in silence, while Anna Brockman sat behind him, fidgeting. Outside the courthouse, protesters rallying against the AI race sang hymns over the voices of lawyers giving press conferences. Two days before trial began, according to Brockman, Musk messaged him to ask if he would be interested in settling. When Brockman suggested that both sides drop their claims, Musk texted back: “By the end of this week, you and Sam will be the most hated men in America. If you insist, so it will be.” Musk stormed out with a Tesla painting Last week, Musk testified that he’s suing to save OpenAI’s nonprofit mission to develop AI safely, but he said he was open to seeing OpenAI become a capped-profit company with moderate investments from Microsoft.  This week, Brockman told the jury that Musk was never truly committed to keeping OpenAI a nonprofit. In the summer of 2017, when an AI model that OpenAI built beat the world’s best players in a video game called Dota 2, Musk hosted a gathering at his “Haunted Mansion” near San Francisco. The house was splattered with confetti and cups, Brockman recalled, and the actress Amber Heard, who was Musk’s girlfriend at the time, served whiskey. “Time to make the next step for OpenAI. This is the triggering event,” Musk wrote in an email—having said weeks earlier that if OpenAI made a major public achievement, it would be “time to create a for-profit,” Brockman told the jury. Over the next six weeks, Brockman said, Musk and the other cofounders had intense discussions about creating a for-profit entity to raise enough capital to build artificial general intelligence—powerful AI that can compete with humans on most cognitive tasks. Musk wanted to have majority equity in the entity and the right to choose a majority of the board members. He also wanted to be its CEO, said Brockman.  Brockman testified that in August 2017, he and other cofounders gathered to hash out the terms of the for-profit structure. Ilya Sutskever, OpenAI’s chief scientist at the time, arrived bearing a painting of a Tesla as a “token of goodwill” in return for the actual Teslas Musk had given them days earlier. “It felt a little bit like [Musk] was buttering us up, right,that he wanted us to feel indebted to him,” Brockman told the jury. When Brockman and Sutskever proposed that they all have equal shares of equity, said Brockman, Musk fell silent and finally said, “I decline.” Musk then stood up and “stormed around the table,” he said. “I actually thought he was going to hit me.” Musk grabbed the painting and walked out.  Brockman said that afterwards he struggled to decide whether to continue building OpenAI with Musk or break away. “There was a fork in the road,” he said. “Do we accept Elon’s terms? Or do we reject the terms, he quits to create his own, and then we create our own?” “The one thing we could not accept was to hand him unilateral, absolute control, potentially, over the AGI,” Brockman told the jury. What was Brockman thinking? In his theatrical baritone, Molo argued that Brockman was motivated by greed rather than a commitment to OpenAI’s nonprofit mission to develop AI that benefits humanity. He noted that while Brockman never invested money in the company, he now owns a stake worth close to $30 billion.  “Solving for the mission has always been my primary motivation,” Brockman said, pushing back on Molo’s characterization of him. “It remains so today.”  Molo pulled up Brockman’s electronic journal on a screen in the courtroom, trying to show the jury what Brockman was really thinking behind the scenes. In 2017, while negotiating with Musk about the future of OpenAI, Brockman wrote about wanting to become a billionaire: “Financially what will take me to $1B?”  “Why didn’t you take the $29 billion and donate it to the nonprofit that you had a fiduciary duty to, for the good of humanity?” Molo asked Brockman, raising his voice to dramatize moral indignation.  Molo then pulled up a journal entry Brockman had written in November 2017, while he was torn over whether to turn OpenAI into a for-profit without Musk: “it’d be wrong to steal the nonprofit from him. to convert to a b-corp without him. that’d be pretty morally bankrupt.” Brockman and Musk had previously considered creating a b-corp, which is a for-profit company that pursues a social mission. Brockman explained, “I meant it would actually serve the mission, but it’d be hard to look at yourself in the mirror.” Molo also tried to undermine Brockman’s credibility by revealing that he holds a stake in multiple companies with business ties to OpenAI, including the AI company Cerebras, the cloud provider CoreWeave, and the nuclear fusion startup Helion Energy. Altman has tried to steer OpenAI into deals with companies that he invests in, including Helion and the rocket maker Stoke Space, drawing scrutiny over potential conflicts of interest. Former OpenAI chief technology officer Mira Murati and former OpenAI board member Helen Toner both appeared in video depositions. They addressed the brief firing of Altman in 2023, saying that they could not trust him because of his alleged history of lying. Murati’s text messages with Altman from that time, which were introduced as evidence, revealed his desperate attempts to understand what was happening and regain control.  Musk plotted a rival AI lab at Tesla After Brockman’s two days of testimony, Shivon Zilis, who left OpenAI’s board in 2023, took the stand in a black jacket and black jeans, appearing composed but with a flicker of nerves. OpenAI’s lawyer Sarah Eddy asked her in a deceptively soothing voice whether she acted as a conduit for Musk as he tried to poach OpenAI’s cofounders to work at a new AI lab within Tesla. Eddy argued that Musk is suing OpenAI only to undermine a competitor in the AI race.  Zilis said she met Musk while working at OpenAI as an informal advisor in 2016, and that they had a “one-off” romantic encounter. In 2017, she joined Tesla and Musk’s brain-implant company, Neuralink. In 2020, she joined OpenAI’s board of directors. She became pregnant with Musk’s children through IVF but did not disclose her ties with Musk to OpenAI until Business Insider reported them in 2022.  By late 2017, Musk had concluded that OpenAI was unlikely to build AGI and pivoted to building an AI lab at Tesla, according to an email sent to Zilis.  Eddy pulled up a draft of an FAQ document that Zilis emailed a colleague at Tesla in 2017 about an event the company was organizing at the NeurIPS AI conference: “The purpose of this event is to share that Tesla is building a world leading AI lab(?) which will rival the likes of Google/DeepMind and Facebook AI Research.”  Zilis told the jury that when Musk was still on OpenAI’s board, he tried to recruit Altman to lead that prospective AI lab. Musk had asked Andrej Karpathy, an OpenAI research scientist he’d recruited to work at Tesla, “to send a list of top OpenAI people to poach,” according to a text message by Zilis.  “There is little chance of OpenAI being a serious force if I focus on TeslaAI,” Musk texted Zilis in 2018, just before he left OpenAI. Tesla’s AI lab never came to fruition. Eddy pressed Zilis about whom she was loyal to when she was working for OpenAI and Musk at the same time. “I had an allegiance to the best outcome for AI for humanity,” Zilis told the jury. What’s going on next week? Next week, Ilya Sutskever will testify, as will Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella. The lawyers for both Musk and OpenAI will deliver their closing arguments. The jury will begin deliberating the week after and deliver an advisory verdict guiding the judge to decide the case. This story is part of MIT Technology Review’s ongoing coverage of the Musk v. Altman trial. Follow @techreview or @michelletomkim on X for up-to-the-minute reporting.

In the second week of the landmark trial between Elon Musk and OpenAI, Musk’s motivations for bringing the suit were under scrutiny.

Last week, Musk took the stand, alleging that OpenAI CEO Sam Altman and president Greg Brockman had deceived him into donating $38 million to the company. He claimed that they’d promised to maintain it as a nonprofit dedicated to developing AI for the benefit of humanity, only to later accept billions of dollars of investment from Microsoft and restructure the company to operate a for-profit subsidiary.  

This week, Brockman fired back with his side of the story, arguing that Musk had actually pushed for OpenAI to create a for-profit arm and fought a bitter battle to have “absolute control” over it. OpenAI has argued that Musk is suing because he didn’t get his way and is now trying to undermine a competitor to his own AI company, xAI.

Shivon Zilis, a former OpenAI board member and the mother of four of Musk’s children, also testified, revealing that Musk tried to recruit OpenAI CEO Sam Altman to lead a new AI lab at his electric-car company, Tesla. 

Musk cofounded OpenAI in 2015 with Altman, Brockman, and others but left in 2018. Now, he’s asking the court to remove Altman and Brockman from their roles and to unwind the restructuring OpenAI undertook last year, which converted its for-profit subsidiary into a public benefit corporation. He is also seeking as much as $134 billion in damages from OpenAI and Microsoft, OpenAI’s investor. 

The outcome of the trial could upend OpenAI’s race toward an IPO at a valuation approaching $1 trillion. Meanwhile, xAI, which Musk founded in 2023, is now a division of his rocket company, SpaceX; the combined companies are also expected to go public as early as June, at a target valuation of $1.75 trillion.

On Monday, Brockman walked into the courtroom in a blue suit and tie, holding hands with his wife, Anna Brockman. On the stand, he was serene, even chipper, as he recalled OpenAI’s early days. But he grew agitated under impassioned questioning from Elon Musk’s lawyer, Steven Molo. Altman listened in silence, while Anna Brockman sat behind him, fidgeting. Outside the courthouse, protesters rallying against the AI race sang hymns over the voices of lawyers giving press conferences.

Two days before trial began, according to Brockman, Musk messaged him to ask if he would be interested in settling. When Brockman suggested that both sides drop their claims, Musk texted back: “By the end of this week, you and Sam will be the most hated men in America. If you insist, so it will be.”

Musk stormed out with a Tesla painting

Last week, Musk testified that he’s suing to save OpenAI’s nonprofit mission to develop AI safely, but he said he was open to seeing OpenAI become a capped-profit company with moderate investments from Microsoft. 

This week, Brockman told the jury that Musk was never truly committed to keeping OpenAI a nonprofit. In the summer of 2017, when an AI model that OpenAI built beat the world’s best players in a video game called Dota 2, Musk hosted a gathering at his “Haunted Mansion” near San Francisco. The house was splattered with confetti and cups, Brockman recalled, and the actress Amber Heard, who was Musk’s girlfriend at the time, served whiskey.

“Time to make the next step for OpenAI. This is the triggering event,” Musk wrote in an email—having said weeks earlier that if OpenAI made a major public achievement, it would be “time to create a for-profit,” Brockman told the jury.

Over the next six weeks, Brockman said, Musk and the other cofounders had intense discussions about creating a for-profit entity to raise enough capital to build artificial general intelligence—powerful AI that can compete with humans on most cognitive tasks. Musk wanted to have majority equity in the entity and the right to choose a majority of the board members. He also wanted to be its CEO, said Brockman. 

Brockman testified that in August 2017, he and other cofounders gathered to hash out the terms of the for-profit structure. Ilya Sutskever, OpenAI’s chief scientist at the time, arrived bearing a painting of a Tesla as a “token of goodwill” in return for the actual Teslas Musk had given them days earlier. “It felt a little bit like [Musk] was buttering us up, right,that he wanted us to feel indebted to him,” Brockman told the jury.

When Brockman and Sutskever proposed that they all have equal shares of equity, said Brockman, Musk fell silent and finally said, “I decline.” Musk then stood up and “stormed around the table,” he said. “I actually thought he was going to hit me.” Musk grabbed the painting and walked out. 

Brockman said that afterwards he struggled to decide whether to continue building OpenAI with Musk or break away. “There was a fork in the road,” he said. “Do we accept Elon’s terms? Or do we reject the terms, he quits to create his own, and then we create our own?”

“The one thing we could not accept was to hand him unilateral, absolute control, potentially, over the AGI,” Brockman told the jury.

What was Brockman thinking?

In his theatrical baritone, Molo argued that Brockman was motivated by greed rather than a commitment to OpenAI’s nonprofit mission to develop AI that benefits humanity. He noted that while Brockman never invested money in the company, he now owns a stake worth close to $30 billion. 

“Solving for the mission has always been my primary motivation,” Brockman said, pushing back on Molo’s characterization of him. “It remains so today.” 

Molo pulled up Brockman’s electronic journal on a screen in the courtroom, trying to show the jury what Brockman was really thinking behind the scenes. In 2017, while negotiating with Musk about the future of OpenAI, Brockman wrote about wanting to become a billionaire: “Financially what will take me to $1B?” 

“Why didn’t you take the $29 billion and donate it to the nonprofit that you had a fiduciary duty to, for the good of humanity?” Molo asked Brockman, raising his voice to dramatize moral indignation. 

Molo then pulled up a journal entry Brockman had written in November 2017, while he was torn over whether to turn OpenAI into a for-profit without Musk: “it’d be wrong to steal the nonprofit from him. to convert to a b-corp without him. that’d be pretty morally bankrupt.” Brockman and Musk had previously considered creating a b-corp, which is a for-profit company that pursues a social mission.

Brockman explained, “I meant it would actually serve the mission, but it’d be hard to look at yourself in the mirror.”

Molo also tried to undermine Brockman’s credibility by revealing that he holds a stake in multiple companies with business ties to OpenAI, including the AI company Cerebras, the cloud provider CoreWeave, and the nuclear fusion startup Helion Energy. Altman has tried to steer OpenAI into deals with companies that he invests in, including Helion and the rocket maker Stoke Space, drawing scrutiny over potential conflicts of interest.

Former OpenAI chief technology officer Mira Murati and former OpenAI board member Helen Toner both appeared in video depositions. They addressed the brief firing of Altman in 2023, saying that they could not trust him because of his alleged history of lying. Murati’s text messages with Altman from that time, which were introduced as evidence, revealed his desperate attempts to understand what was happening and regain control. 

Musk plotted a rival AI lab at Tesla

After Brockman’s two days of testimony, Shivon Zilis, who left OpenAI’s board in 2023, took the stand in a black jacket and black jeans, appearing composed but with a flicker of nerves. OpenAI’s lawyer Sarah Eddy asked her in a deceptively soothing voice whether she acted as a conduit for Musk as he tried to poach OpenAI’s cofounders to work at a new AI lab within Tesla. Eddy argued that Musk is suing OpenAI only to undermine a competitor in the AI race. 

Zilis said she met Musk while working at OpenAI as an informal advisor in 2016, and that they had a “one-off” romantic encounter. In 2017, she joined Tesla and Musk’s brain-implant company, Neuralink. In 2020, she joined OpenAI’s board of directors. She became pregnant with Musk’s children through IVF but did not disclose her ties with Musk to OpenAI until Business Insider reported them in 2022. 

By late 2017, Musk had concluded that OpenAI was unlikely to build AGI and pivoted to building an AI lab at Tesla, according to an email sent to Zilis. 

Eddy pulled up a draft of an FAQ document that Zilis emailed a colleague at Tesla in 2017 about an event the company was organizing at the NeurIPS AI conference: “The purpose of this event is to share that Tesla is building a world leading AI lab(?) which will rival the likes of Google/DeepMind and Facebook AI Research.” 

Zilis told the jury that when Musk was still on OpenAI’s board, he tried to recruit Altman to lead that prospective AI lab. Musk had asked Andrej Karpathy, an OpenAI research scientist he’d recruited to work at Tesla, “to send a list of top OpenAI people to poach,” according to a text message by Zilis. 

“There is little chance of OpenAI being a serious force if I focus on TeslaAI,” Musk texted Zilis in 2018, just before he left OpenAI. Tesla’s AI lab never came to fruition.

Eddy pressed Zilis about whom she was loyal to when she was working for OpenAI and Musk at the same time. “I had an allegiance to the best outcome for AI for humanity,” Zilis told the jury.

What’s going on next week?

Next week, Ilya Sutskever will testify, as will Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella. The lawyers for both Musk and OpenAI will deliver their closing arguments. The jury will begin deliberating the week after and deliver an advisory verdict guiding the judge to decide the case.

This story is part of MIT Technology Review’s ongoing coverage of the Musk v. Altman trial. Follow @techreview or @michelletomkim on X for up-to-the-minute reporting.

Shape
Shape
Stay Ahead

Explore More Insights

More Articles

Stay ahead with more perspectives on cutting-edge power, infrastructure, energy,  bitcoin and AI solutions. Explore these articles to uncover strategies and insights shaping the future of industries.

Shape

Aggressive federal PQE timeline prompts warnings for enterprises

“The U.S. government’s EOs will likely spur accelerated intervention from all major governments and regional political blocs,” the firm said. “CISOs should be prepared for regulations to conflict and contain sovereignty requirements, which will complicate compliance.” Gartner recommends that companies build a PQC inventory and remediation program in 2026 and

Read More »

Presidential order addresses quantum computing gaps

By comparison, in AI, there are a number of benchmarks comparing AI models on everything from how well they do at math, to their ability to generate images, to whether they can find bugs in computer code. Benchmarks are important so that people can do fair comparisons of quantum systems,

Read More »

Equinor to invest in additional Troll development to boost European gas supply

Equinor Energy AS and partners will invest more than 4 billion krone ($400 million) in a new subsea development to increase gas production from Troll field in the North Sea. The Troll West Increased gas recovery North (TWIN) expansion—the third step of Troll Phase 3, which produces gas from the Troll West reservoir—could come online as early as 2028, said Gunnar Nakken, Equinor’s senior vice-president for projects and subsea Norway. TWIN is expected to contribute around 11 billion standard cu m of gas. “By simplifying, increasing standardization and reusing existing infrastructure and equipment, we are reducing costs and enabling faster production,” he said. Equinor aims to produce 1.3 million b/d from the Norwegian Continental Shelf (NCS) in 2035 to meet a portion of Europe’s energy needs. Troll field contains about 40% of NCS total gas reserves, with gas from Troll meeting around 10% of Europe’s gas needs. The TWIN project consists of two wells in a template and a pipeline connected to existing subsea infrastructure. The umbilical and MEG line will be extended to the new development. The second step of Troll Phase 3 is expected to come online this year, continuing production from Troll A platform, 80 km northwest of Bergen, Norway, and the Gassco-operated Kollsnes processing plant towards 2030, Equinor said. Equinor is operator of the project with 30.55% interest. Partners are Petoro AS (55.93%), A/S Norske Shell (8.19%), TotalEnergies EP Norge AS (3.69%), and ConocoPhillips Skandinavia AS (1.64%).

Read More »

Zululand Energy Terminal invites EPC expressions of interest

The proposed 7.5-million tonne/year (tpy) Zululand Energy Terminal (ZET) at the Port of Richards Bay, South Africa, has invited expressions of interest (EOI) from engineering, procurement and construction (EPC) contractors for development of planned LNG regasification infrastructure. Imported natural gas is expected to supply both industry and power generation. Phase 1 of the project will use a 170,000-cu m floating storage unit attached to 3 million tpy of onshore regasification capacity. Phase 2 will add 220,000 cu m of onshore storage (potentially replacing the FSU) and 4.5 million tpy of regasification.  ZET hopes to complete detailed engineering during 2027 to reach final investment decision in 2028 and start operations in 2030. Reuters reported last week that ExxonMobil Corp. had signed a preliminary deal to supply LNG to ZET. Developed as a joint between Vopak Terminal Durban and Transnet Pipelines, ZET project is expected to be South Africa’s first LNG terminal. The consortium will design, develop, construct, finance, operate, and maintain the terminal in the South Dunes Precinct at the Port of Richards Bay over a 25-year concession. EPC execution will be subject to ZET’s localization and economic development objectives. Successful contractors will be expected to support local supplier participation, skills development, and the use of local labor. Qualifying parties will be included in the project’s vendor database and may be shortlisted for subsequent phases as potential preferred contractors or subcontractors. The EOI submission window closes July 9, 2026. Interested contractors are invited to access the full EOI documentation here. South African utility Eskom and ZET earlier this month signed a head of agreement (HOA) establishing the framework for a long-term strategic partnership to support South Africa’s gas-to-power program, underpinning a planned 3-Gw power plant near the terminal in KwaZulu-Natal. Vopak Terminal Durban is owned by Royal Vopak and Reatile Group

Read More »

Petrobras greenlights renewables plant for RPBC refinery

REDUC’s fist soybean oil-based SAF sale Announcement of FID on the RPBC renewables plant followed Petrobras’ June 17 confirmation that its 239,000-b/d Duque de Caxias (REDUC) refinery in the Baixada Fluminense area of Rio de Janeiro had completed first production and sale of a first 3,800-cu m batch of SAF made from soybean oil certified under the CORSIA low Land Use Change (ILUC) risk standard, which verifies sustainability criteria and a lower risk of impact on new land areas. Produced via co-processing and featuring 1% renewable content, the SAF batch marked “commercialization of the world’s first SAF made from certified low-ILUC-risk soy [to demonstrate] Petrobras’s commitment to sustainability, the energy transition, and the development of products aligned with market and societal demands [for lower-carbon solutions],” said Angélica Laureano, Petrobras’ director of logistics, sales, and markets. In October 2025, the REDUC refinery secured Brazil’s first international approval to advance commercial-scale production of SAF via the hydroprocessed esters and fatty acids (HEFA) co-processing route complying with ISCC System GmbH’s International Sustainability Carbon Certification (ISCC) standards, validating that SAF produced at the site meets the highest international sustainability and lifecycle carbon emission standards. Developed under ICAO’s CORSIA, the ISCC CORSIA certification was a prerequisite for commercial-scale SAF production following rigorous assessment of the production’s lifecycle carbon emissions and traceability. Equipped to produce as much as 10,000 b/d of SAF using a blend of conventional petroleum and up to 1.2% renewable feedstock, REDUC’s integration of bio-based oils—such as vegetable oil—into existing refining infrastructure via the HEFA co-processing method allows the refinery to produce SAF alongside conventional jet fuel with minimal investment, Petrobras previously said.

Read More »

Equinor to expand Troll with TWIN subsea development

Equinor Energy AS and partners will invest about NOK 4 billion ($410 million) in the new Troll West increased gas recovery north (TWIN) subsea development in Troll field in the North Sea. The TWIN project consists of two wells in a template and a pipeline connected to existing subsea infrastructure. The umbilical and monoethylene glycol line will be extended to the new development. The project is expected to contribute about 11 billion std cu m of gas to Troll. It is the third step of Troll Phase 3, which produces gas from the Troll West reservoir. Recoverable reserves from Troll Phase 3, mainly gas, are estimated at 2.2 billion boe. In accordance with the Petroleum Act, the partnership will now send an announcement to the Ministry of Energy concerning the development. An environmental impact assessment has been carried out. Troll, which supplies as much as 10% of Europe’s daily demand for gas, contains about 40% of the total gas reserves on the Norwegian continental shelf and was developed in phases, with gas extraction from Troll Øst in Phase 1 and oil from Troll West in Phase 2. The oil in Troll West is produced from multiple subsea templates tied into Troll B and Troll C via pipelines. Production from the Troll C installation started in 1999. Troll C is also used for production from Fram, Fram H-Nord, and Byrding. Several amended development plans were approved in connection with installing multiple subsea templates on Troll West. Equinor Energy AS is operator of TWIN (30.55%) with partners Petoro AS (55.93%), A/S Norske Shell (8.19%), TotalEnergies EP Norge AS (3.69%), and ConocoPhillips Skandinavia AS (1.64%).

Read More »

ICYMI: Upstream M&A slows on pricing gaps while deal appetite holds

Despite a slowdown in headline deal values this spring, upstream mergers and acquisitions remain active beneath the surface. In this ICYMI episode of the Oil & Gas Journal ReEnterprised podcast, Mikaila Adams, managing editor, examines data from Enverus and Rystad Energy detailing international and North American upstream deal markets in 2025 and into 2026. The discussion explores how pricing uncertainty widened the gap between buyers and sellers, creating a temporary pause rather than a collapse in market activity. The episode also looks at where capital continues to flow and what those trends reveal about the industry’s direction. From North American consolidation led by the Devon Energy–Coterra Energy merger to continued interest in gas-weighted assets tied to Gulf Coast LNG exports, the analysis highlights the forces shaping today’s upstream M&A landscape. It also considers the likelihood of additional divestitures, private equity activity, and asset sales as companies refine their portfolios, pointing to continued dealmaking momentum even in a more volatile market. References Devon, Coterra joining forces to create 1.6 million boe/d shale titan https://www.ogj.com/general-interest/companies/news/55354563/devon-coterra-joining-forces-to-create-16-million-boe-d-shale-titan Ovintiv to divest Anadarko assets for $3 billion https://www.ogj.com/general-interest/companies/news/55358241/ovintiv-to-divest-anadarko-assets-for-3-billion Insights: Vaca Muerta’s scale, productivity—and why it has more to give https://www.ogj.com/home/podcast/55370296/insights-vaca-muertas-scale-productivityand-why-it-has-more-to-give Mitsubishi to enter US shale gas business through Haynesville asset acquisition https://www.ogj.com/general-interest/companies/news/55344199/mitsubishi-to-enter-us-shale-gas-business-through-haynesville-shale-acquisition Shell to expand Canadian operations with $16.4-billion acquisition of ARC Resources https://www.ogj.com/general-interest/companies/news/55373597/shell-to-expand-canadian-operations-with-164-billion-acquisition-of-arc-resources US upstream M&A hits $38 billion in 1Q26 before volatility temporarily pauses the market https://www.enverus.com/newsroom/u-s-upstream-ma-hits-38-billion-in-1q26-before-volatility-temporarily-pauses-the-market/ International upstream M&A stuck at historic low https://www.enverus.com/newsroom/international-upstream-ma-stuck-at-historic-low/ Upstream deal value falls 83% as oil price uncertainty widens the buyer-seller gap https://www.rystadenergy.com/insights/upstream-deal-value-falls Iran war impact on global oil markets https://www.ogj.com/IranWar

Read More »

JPMorgan conference notes: COO says EOG will ‘continue to be explorationist’

When Gaspar announced the $22 billion deal for Coterra in February, investors and analysts quickly began to question the future of the Marcellus assets that had been under Coterra’s umbrella. Activist investor Kimmeridge had been calling for Coterra’s board to divest that asset and focus on the Delaware, a push that has since landed on Gaspar’s desk and one the executive has repeatedly said will be addressed via a broader review of the enlarged Devon’s holdings. Several times during his chat with Jayaram, Gaspar touted Devon’s prowess in the Delaware—adding Coterra’s operations has grown its footprint there to nearly 750,000 acres—and delineated the review process as covering three main points. What’s the value of the various assets on their own? What’s the market for them and who might the strategic and financial buyers be? (Here, Gaspar specifically mentioned asset-backed securitization (ABS) money “that’s really entered the space.”) And thirdly, and “very fundamentally important,” how complementary are the individual business units to each other? Could discerning observers interpret the latter as suggesting that the Marcellus assets are indeed the odd duck in the group, as Kimmeridge has said? (See the map above.) And is the ABS reference more than a winking acknowledgment of a Reuters report a month ago that money manager Stone Ridge Asset Management had bid $8 billion for the Marcellus division using securitization as a big financial lever? Gaspar didn’t elaborate and Jayaram didn’t press the issue. But Gaspar emphasized that clarity around the review isn’t far away: “We’ve telegraphed this is more of a months exercise, not a years exercise. […] The view with which we are approaching this, we are aggressive. We will be mindful of how do we take this moment in time to create more value for the shareholders.”

Read More »

You can’t build sovereign infrastructure with Broadcom, says CISPE

CISPE has cited several reasons why VCF doesn’t fit the bill, in particular highlighting its lack of portability. This means that it doesn’t qualify as resilient under CISPE’s Sovereign and Resilient Cloud Framework. Earlier this month, the EU unveiled proposals for its Cloud and AI Development Act (CADA) to strengthen Europe’s digital economy. CADA will encourage investment in European research, lay down conditions for European data centers, and provide a single EU-wide assessment framework for cloud and AI sovereignty. CISPE said that Broadcom is a long way short of fulfilling the conditions proposed for CADA. Broadcom would fail to meet anything but a Level 1 certification under the CADA sovereignty framework, CISPE said, adding that Broadcom’s terms and conditions offer limited maintenance commitments, no source-code escrow, no substitution plan and no Data Act certification, all likely to fall foul of CADA’s recommendations.

Read More »

Break legacy lock-in: Strategic options for enterprises facing the vSphere 8 deadline

The acquisition of VMware by Broadcom has caused many enterprise IT leaders to reexamine their infrastructure strategies. For organizations running vSphere 8, the October 2027 end-of-support deadline is rapidly becoming a planning priority. What may appear to be a routine upgrade is driving bigger discussions about cost, flexibility, cloud strategy, and long-term infrastructure direction.  Many organizations have not only begun evaluating alternatives but also are leaving VMware.  “VMware has been a great, innovative company,” says Harsha Kotikela, senior director of product and solutions marketing at Nutanix. “But since the acquisition, their business model has fundamentally changed, and that is what is forcing IT leaders to adapt.” Sticker shock, vendor lock-in, and the need for flexibility One of the biggest catalysts has been licensing costs. Organizations that had grown accustomed to predictable contracts have encountered significant pricing increases, creating what Kotikela describes as “sticker shock.” At the same time, some enterprises are reevaluating their vendor relationships due to concerns about support availability and changes in partner engagement models. Beyond immediate operational concerns, IT leaders are also focused on future requirements. Hybrid cloud environments have become the norm, with applications and data distributed across data centers, public clouds, and edge locations. AI initiatives are adding another layer of complexity, requiring infrastructure that can support workloads wherever they need to run. “The future is about flexibility,” Kotikela says. “If enterprises want to implement AI at the edge, in the data center, or in the cloud, they need the capability to manage that environment without creating silos.” That flexibility is becoming a critical factor in infrastructure decisions. Organizations increasingly want platforms that support multiple deployment models, open APIs, and cloud-native technologies to minimize the risk of vendor lock-in. How a future-ready platform addresses IT and business requirements Nutanix positions its architecture around openness and choice, according to

Read More »

Qualcomm’s $3.9 billion purchase of Modular aims to change the data center dynamic

“Nvidia has something like 85% of the AI accelerator chip market,” he pointed out. “Sure, they have nowhere to go but down, but that’s still going to take them a while. More importantly, they have literally spent decades working with practitioners in AI and ML and compute-intensive fields, indoctrinating them into their CUDA software ecosystem. Rewriting that tool chain will take institutional change at most organizations, which means years, if not decades, to uncouple.” “Organizations that think they’ve achieved agnosticism because they’re using high-level abstractions like PyTorch, well,  they have come closest,” he observed. “But just cutting and pasting the same code into AMD Instinct can lead to memory and dependency errors. It’s like VM lift and shifts to the public cloud 10 years ago. Easier, but still possible to screw up.” Nonetheless, Annand said that the deal, if it goes through, is still good news for enterprises. 

Read More »

KKR Bets Big on AI Infrastructure With Helix Launch, Tapping Former AWS CEO Adam Selipsky to Build a New Hyperscale Model

To close industry watchers, it’s really no secret that the AI infrastructure race has entered another phase; one where capital formation itself may become as strategically important as GPUs, power procurement, or liquid cooling. And in launching Helix Digital Infrastructure, investment giant KKR is making a calculated wager that hyperscalers no longer simply need developers or financiers. They need a partner capable of orchestrating capital, energy, connectivity, and data center execution as a unified platform. The significance of that strategy is underscored by the executive chosen to lead it. Adam Selipsky, the former CEO of Amazon Web Services and one of the industry’s most experienced cloud operators, will serve as Co-Founder and CEO of Helix, bringing firsthand experience from the very class of customers the new venture intends to serve. A New Model for AI Infrastructure Helix launches with more than $10 billion in long-duration committed capital from founding investors including KKR, the Kuwait Investment Authority (KIA), NVIDIA, and Vistra. But the headline number tells only part of the story. The company has been structured around an increasingly important thesis: that AI infrastructure can no longer be assembled piecemeal. Rather than treating data centers, electrical supply, transmission capacity, and fiber connectivity as separate procurement exercises, Helix proposes a vertically coordinated approach in which a single organization manages and finances the entire infrastructure stack. According to KKR, the objective is to reduce execution risk and accelerate deployment for hyperscale customers facing unprecedented AI demand. As AI factories grow from hundreds of megawatts toward gigawatt-scale campuses, synchronization among land acquisition, utility planning, financing, construction, and technology deployment has emerged as one of the industry’s defining challenges. Helix is effectively positioning itself as an operating platform designed to simplify that complexity. Why Selipsky Matters The appointment of Adam Selipsky may be the announcement’s

Read More »

Beyond Hyperscale: Why Enterprise Data Centers Still Matter in the AI Era

“The enterprise data centers, even the new ones, tend to be far, far smaller than new hyperscale deployments,” Killian said. “Not uncommon to see enterprises deploy a quarter meg or one meg or two, maybe up to 10 megs. Whereas the hyperscale guys are deploying 40 up to 300 meg facilities.” But scale alone does not tell the story. For every one of the roughly 20 hyperscale users that dominate headlines, Killian noted, there may be 50 to 100 times as many large and mid-sized enterprise users. Those companies run critical business systems, purchase hardware, software, telecom and services, employ large data center teams, and often operate multiple facilities across domestic, edge, EMEA and Asia-Pacific footprints. In other words, enterprise demand may be smaller in unit size, but it remains massive in aggregate. And as AI shifts from training to inference, the enterprise data center could become newly strategic. Enterprise AI Is Not Hyperscale AI Killian’s central point is that enterprise infrastructure requirements differ materially from hyperscale requirements. Hyperscalers are primarily optimizing for massive scale and speed to market. Enterprises, by contrast, tend to prioritize reliability, flexibility, integration into broader IT systems, and audit and compliance. That difference has major implications for developers and colocation providers. “The real industry opportunity is to take some of the innovation and the economies of scale that we’re seeing from the hyperscale builds to deliver smaller chunks of data center capacity,” Killian said. That might mean adapting lessons from 40 MW or 100 MW campuses into enterprise-ready deployments of 2 MW, 4 MW or 8 MW. Killian pointed to providers such as DataBank and Flexential as examples of companies working to deliver hyperscale-derived efficiencies in smaller enterprise increments. He also noted that QTS and other large campus developers may reserve portions of multi-building campuses

Read More »

Revolutionizing Data Center Cooling: Innovations for AI and HPC Growth

This is a crucial point for AI infrastructure. In some markets, water can be as politically and operationally difficult as power. Evaporative cooling and cooling towers can consume large volumes of water, while discharge permits can slow projects or limit operations. Gradiant claims HyperSolved can expand access to alternative sources such as municipal reuse and impaired supplies, reduce reliance on freshwater, protect cooling performance through integrated treatment and AI-enabled operations, and minimize discharge through high-recovery concentration and reuse. The platform uses containerized systems for immediate or temporary capacity while also supporting permanent infrastructure and lifecycle operations from commissioning onward. That fits the AI data center buildout, where developers may need bridge capacity during construction, phased water infrastructure, or interim systems while permanent treatment plants are completed. This can address the speed of deployment issue that plagues many data center solutions. Water is becoming a siting and scaling variable that has to be addressed. A site may have land and power prospects, but if water sourcing, reuse, or discharge cannot be solved, the project will face higher costs, delays, and local opposition. Gradiant is positioning itself as the managed water layer for hyperscale AI, similar to how power providers, cooling vendors, and network suppliers each own critical infrastructure domains. The Pattern: Hybridization, Standardization, and Industrial Scale The announcements included here make it clear that cooling is seeing significant attention from technology vendors, and not just state-of-the-art new technologies such as direct-to-chip, but also traditional data center air cooling. T-Global and SiPearl are working on high-conductivity materials and two-phase modules for HPC chips. Castrol is providing fluids for direct-to-chip and immersion environments. These are technologies aimed at the heat source itself, where higher chip power and rack density are overwhelming conventional approaches. The reference design offerings from Johnson Controls acknowledges the importance

Read More »

Microsoft will invest $80B in AI data centers in fiscal 2025

And Microsoft isn’t the only one that is ramping up its investments into AI-enabled data centers. Rival cloud service providers are all investing in either upgrading or opening new data centers to capture a larger chunk of business from developers and users of large language models (LLMs).  In a report published in October 2024, Bloomberg Intelligence estimated that demand for generative AI would push Microsoft, AWS, Google, Oracle, Meta, and Apple would between them devote $200 billion to capex in 2025, up from $110 billion in 2023. Microsoft is one of the biggest spenders, followed closely by Google and AWS, Bloomberg Intelligence said. Its estimate of Microsoft’s capital spending on AI, at $62.4 billion for calendar 2025, is lower than Smith’s claim that the company will invest $80 billion in the fiscal year to June 30, 2025. Both figures, though, are way higher than Microsoft’s 2020 capital expenditure of “just” $17.6 billion. The majority of the increased spending is tied to cloud services and the expansion of AI infrastructure needed to provide compute capacity for OpenAI workloads. Separately, last October Amazon CEO Andy Jassy said his company planned total capex spend of $75 billion in 2024 and even more in 2025, with much of it going to AWS, its cloud computing division.

Read More »

John Deere unveils more autonomous farm machines to address skill labor shortage

Join our daily and weekly newsletters for the latest updates and exclusive content on industry-leading AI coverage. Learn More Self-driving tractors might be the path to self-driving cars. John Deere has revealed a new line of autonomous machines and tech across agriculture, construction and commercial landscaping. The Moline, Illinois-based John Deere has been in business for 187 years, yet it’s been a regular as a non-tech company showing off technology at the big tech trade show in Las Vegas and is back at CES 2025 with more autonomous tractors and other vehicles. This is not something we usually cover, but John Deere has a lot of data that is interesting in the big picture of tech. The message from the company is that there aren’t enough skilled farm laborers to do the work that its customers need. It’s been a challenge for most of the last two decades, said Jahmy Hindman, CTO at John Deere, in a briefing. Much of the tech will come this fall and after that. He noted that the average farmer in the U.S. is over 58 and works 12 to 18 hours a day to grow food for us. And he said the American Farm Bureau Federation estimates there are roughly 2.4 million farm jobs that need to be filled annually; and the agricultural work force continues to shrink. (This is my hint to the anti-immigration crowd). John Deere’s autonomous 9RX Tractor. Farmers can oversee it using an app. While each of these industries experiences their own set of challenges, a commonality across all is skilled labor availability. In construction, about 80% percent of contractors struggle to find skilled labor. And in commercial landscaping, 86% of landscaping business owners can’t find labor to fill open positions, he said. “They have to figure out how to do

Read More »

2025 playbook for enterprise AI success, from agents to evals

Join our daily and weekly newsletters for the latest updates and exclusive content on industry-leading AI coverage. Learn More 2025 is poised to be a pivotal year for enterprise AI. The past year has seen rapid innovation, and this year will see the same. This has made it more critical than ever to revisit your AI strategy to stay competitive and create value for your customers. From scaling AI agents to optimizing costs, here are the five critical areas enterprises should prioritize for their AI strategy this year. 1. Agents: the next generation of automation AI agents are no longer theoretical. In 2025, they’re indispensable tools for enterprises looking to streamline operations and enhance customer interactions. Unlike traditional software, agents powered by large language models (LLMs) can make nuanced decisions, navigate complex multi-step tasks, and integrate seamlessly with tools and APIs. At the start of 2024, agents were not ready for prime time, making frustrating mistakes like hallucinating URLs. They started getting better as frontier large language models themselves improved. “Let me put it this way,” said Sam Witteveen, cofounder of Red Dragon, a company that develops agents for companies, and that recently reviewed the 48 agents it built last year. “Interestingly, the ones that we built at the start of the year, a lot of those worked way better at the end of the year just because the models got better.” Witteveen shared this in the video podcast we filmed to discuss these five big trends in detail. Models are getting better and hallucinating less, and they’re also being trained to do agentic tasks. Another feature that the model providers are researching is a way to use the LLM as a judge, and as models get cheaper (something we’ll cover below), companies can use three or more models to

Read More »

OpenAI’s red teaming innovations define new essentials for security leaders in the AI era

Join our daily and weekly newsletters for the latest updates and exclusive content on industry-leading AI coverage. Learn More OpenAI has taken a more aggressive approach to red teaming than its AI competitors, demonstrating its security teams’ advanced capabilities in two areas: multi-step reinforcement and external red teaming. OpenAI recently released two papers that set a new competitive standard for improving the quality, reliability and safety of AI models in these two techniques and more. The first paper, “OpenAI’s Approach to External Red Teaming for AI Models and Systems,” reports that specialized teams outside the company have proven effective in uncovering vulnerabilities that might otherwise have made it into a released model because in-house testing techniques may have missed them. In the second paper, “Diverse and Effective Red Teaming with Auto-Generated Rewards and Multi-Step Reinforcement Learning,” OpenAI introduces an automated framework that relies on iterative reinforcement learning to generate a broad spectrum of novel, wide-ranging attacks. Going all-in on red teaming pays practical, competitive dividends It’s encouraging to see competitive intensity in red teaming growing among AI companies. When Anthropic released its AI red team guidelines in June of last year, it joined AI providers including Google, Microsoft, Nvidia, OpenAI, and even the U.S.’s National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), which all had released red teaming frameworks. Investing heavily in red teaming yields tangible benefits for security leaders in any organization. OpenAI’s paper on external red teaming provides a detailed analysis of how the company strives to create specialized external teams that include cybersecurity and subject matter experts. The goal is to see if knowledgeable external teams can defeat models’ security perimeters and find gaps in their security, biases and controls that prompt-based testing couldn’t find. What makes OpenAI’s recent papers noteworthy is how well they define using human-in-the-middle

Read More »
More Articles