We built a rule-based model of the whole ambition (every deal archetype, every funding source, every covenant) and published it to be attacked. This is what 10,000 deals does to the machine, the supply, and every stakeholder. It is an illustrative model, not guidance, and it refuses to predict price.
This is the time-based model. There is also a deal-based stress test with no calendar at all, the same machine measured in deals closed, not years elapsed.
Run the stress test →A model earns trust by what it declines to predict. Every output on this page is per-share arithmetic; nothing on this page is a price.
Price is the market's job. Per-share cash flow is ours. A model that predicted price would be marketing; a model that publishes its arithmetic is a target, and targets are what build trust.
Deals on the platform, year by year, 2026–2040. The y-axis is logarithmic. An honest way to draw a machine whose cadence compounds. 2026 is the only actuals-basis year; every later point is model output.
The roadmap names the eras; the model prices them. Each card is the same machine at a different scale: same covenants, same Engine, same discipline.
Court order, bondholder consent, prospectus, four published numbers, then H1 2027 TGE at 300M shares. The bond's initial series deploys; 14 deals close in year one, sourced from the NapkinDeals.com funnel. NAV/share starts at $0.73.
73 deals in two years, still hand-scale. The 100th deal closes in 2029; per-deal economics published for every one. Cumulative attested FCF crosses $100M, arming the Engine's first step-up. Scout bounties reach ~$6M a year.
Deal cadence goes to software speed: 120, 300, then 475 closes a year, 65–70% micro tuck-ins. The Engine steps 30% (2030) then 40% (2032) on hard-currency milestones. Cumulative burn passes 155M shares; outstanding peaks at ~658M in 2031 and starts falling. The countdown becomes visible on-chain.
Retained FCF now funds most acquisitions. The machine buys companies with its own cash flow, the arc Constellation proved. Treasury issuance thins against the 1B cap (equity consideration ~$110M/yr, capped); sellers who want equity buy it in the market instead. Distributions reach $600M+ a year.
The 500M cumulative burn target is reached in 2038. The buyback leg rolls into distributions, which reach ~$2.6B a year. Outstanding settles at ~473M shares against 973M ever issued. RSX activates with the portfolio as its inaugural listings. The 10,000th deal closes in 2040: a nine-employee shop the public market never had a door for.
ERA FIGURES ARE MODEL OUTPUT, NOT GUIDANCE. DATES ARE MODELING INPUTS, NOT PROMISES.
The tokenomics heart of the model: issuance capped under 1,000,000,000 authorized, a burn countdown that completes in 2038, and the two per-share lines every mechanism points at.
| Year | Deals | Revenue | EBITDA | FCF | Engine % | Engine $ | Shares out | Burned cum | NAV/share | FCF/share | Leverage |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026Actuals basis | 18 | $152.5M | $38.2M | , | , | , | , | 0.0M | , | , | , |
| 2027 | 32 | $386.7M | $83.8M | $31.7M | 20% | $6.30M | 360.6M | 4.3M | $0.73 | $0.09 | 2.71x |
| 2028 | 60 | $774.4M | $160.1M | $66.1M | 20% | $13.2M | 450.9M | 12.0M | $0.85 | $0.15 | 2.37x |
| 2029 | 105 | $1.50B | $298.9M | $117.2M | 20% | $23.4M | 557.8M | 23.2M | $1.02 | $0.21 | 2.63x |
| 2030 | 225 | $3.02B | $591.1M | $220.4M | 30% | $66.1M | 624.1M | 49.1M | $1.23 | $0.35 | 2.93x |
| 2031 | 525 | $6.09B | $1.19B | $425.6M | 30% | $127.7M | 657.9M | 87.3M | $1.58 | $0.65 | 3.10x |
| 2032 | 1,000 | $10.6B | $2.08B | $750.7M | 40% | $300.3M | 646.4M | 154.7M | $1.99 | $1.16 | 3.10x |
| 2033 | 1,620 | $16.4B | $3.21B | $1.18B | 40% | $472.9M | 621.2M | 223.8M | $2.62 | $1.90 | 3.03x |
| 2034 | 2,375 | $23.3B | $4.57B | $1.73B | 40% | $691.6M | 589.8M | 289.3M | $3.52 | $2.93 | 2.91x |
| 2035 | 3,182 | $30.9B | $6.07B | $2.36B | 40% | $945.6M | 554.7M | 350.9M | $4.78 | $4.26 | 2.76x |
| 2036 | 4,007 | $39.3B | $7.71B | $3.09B | 40% | $1.24B | 517.9M | 408.5M | $6.54 | $5.96 | 2.62x |
| 2037 | 5,149 | $50.2B | $9.87B | $4.04B | 40% | $1.62B | 480.7M | 461.9M | $8.98 | $8.41 | 2.49x |
| 2038 | 6,436 | $62.7B | $12.3B | $5.17B | 40% | $2.07B | 455.2M | 500.0M | $12.04 | $11.36 | 2.36x |
| 2039 | 8,058 | $77.9B | $15.3B | $6.57B | 40% | $2.63B | 465.1M | 500.0M | $14.90 | $14.13 | 2.23x |
| 2040 | 10,000 | $94.9B | $18.7B | $8.23B | 40% | $3.29B | 472.8M | 500.0M | $18.42 | $17.40 | 2.08x |
All currency figures CAD; revenue, EBITDA, FCF, and Engine dollars in millions; shares in millions. 2026 is the management-reported run-rate basis of the dashboard. Every later row is deterministic model output from the published assumptions.
Deals of every size, sourced the same way: the NapkinDeals.com funnel. From a $2M septic contractor to a twelve-company succession portfolio. The buy box is the constant, the scale is the variable.
Illustrative model deals. These are representative of the buy box, the funnel, and the consideration mechanics. They are not announcements, targets, or actual transactions.
A NapkinDeals.com listing 40 miles from CCE's yard. Retiring founder, two crews, Lennar-adjacent work. Closed in 47 days; the seller's equity leg makes him a holder of the platform his crews now feed.
The second platform-scale deal, underwritten against the bond's first series. Equipment-heavy, collateral-rich: exactly what the ETN's first-ranking liens were designed to finance.
The equity-preference principle at work: the seller pledged double the average equity component and jumped the algorithmically ranked queue of 22,369+ deals to close in a quarter.
The 100th closed deal: sourced by a community Deal Scout who earned a ~$240K vested-NPKN bounty. The milestone the whole model asks to be judged on, closed by the community itself.
The first major deal in the issuer's home province: succession-driven, asset-heavy, and a signal that the machine's rails run wherever the sellers are.
Era-3 platform deal: municipal water and utility services across four states. The AI CapEx Supercycle's least glamorous, most durable layer (water in, data out.
Three family logistics firms in one arrangement, sourced through the LATAM network Levector has run since 2022. The playlist goes properly global.
Twelve family manufacturers, one court-supervised succession structure. The German succession wave meeting the only buyer built to close twelve at once.
Skynet's engineering arm becomes an acquisition rail: the team that built the AAA stack onboards a 140-engineer services firm onto it in six weeks.
The 10,000th deal is small on purpose. A shop the public market never had a door for, whose owner retires with a fair price, a seller note, and 100,000 shares of the machine that bought it. This deal is the mission.
Every modeled deal enters through the same funnel the real ones do: NapkinDeals.com: 22,369+ deals live across 50+ countries, ranked by the equity-preference queue.
Visit NapkinDeals.comA model you cannot attack is a brochure. These are all of the inputs (the starting point, the deal mix, the funding stack, the Engine mechanics) stated plainly enough to be rebuilt in a spreadsheet.
| Assumption | Value | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Starting point | 18 deals · $152.5M revenue · $38.2M EBITDA (2026 run-rate) | The dashboard's platform basis: CCE, GCUC, Rock Solid/Innerflow closed. |
| TGE | H1 2027 · 300M shares outstanding · $125M raised | Conversion gates G1–G4 first; prospectus timelines make H1 2027 the realistic window. |
| FCF conversion | 60% of EBITDA, before interest (50% in downside) | Capex, tax, and working-capital proxy for asset-heavy services. |
| Organic growth | 5% per year (3% downside) | Below the construction book's own forecast (10–15%); conservatism is the point. |
| Deal mix | 5 archetypes, $2.2M to $200M EV, 3.0–6.0x EBITDA | Buy-box economics: tangible assets, durable cash flow, LBO-serviceable. |
| Consideration | 25% seller notes; equity 25%→45% as the currency proves; cash the rest | The equity-preference flywheel: bounded by the 1B share cap, honestly. |
| Issuance rule | All issuance at 1.15× NAV; never below NAV | The NAV discipline covenant, applied literally. |
| Supply | 1,000,000,000 authorized, hard cap; burns stop at 500M cumulative | The terminal-supply covenant. The model never issues share 1,000,000,001. |
| The Engine | 20% → 30% → 40% of FCF at $100M / $500M cumulative attested FCF | Hard-currency milestones, not deal counts. 50/50 buyback-and-cancel vs distributions. |
| Buyback price | Modeled at NAV (neutral to NAV/share) | Conservative: real buybacks below NAV would be accretive. We don't model the discount we hope for. |
| Debt | Bond 8% (EUR 500M → 2B program), notes 6.5%, equipment/ABL 7.5% | The actual capital stack: Vienna ETN, seller notes, Pathward-style asset financing. |
| Deal cadence | 14 deals in 2027 → 1,942 in 2040 (peak ~8 per business day) | Only credible with AI-native diligence, which is the entire operating thesis. |
| Archetype | EV | Multiple | EBITDA | Share of 2040 count |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Micro tuck-in | $2.2M | 3.0x | $0.7M | ~72% of deal count |
| SMB standard | $8M | 3.5x | $2.3M | ~25% |
| Mid-market | $30M | 4.5x | $6.7M | ~3% |
| Large | $80M | 5.5x | $14.5M | <1% |
| Platform | $200M | 6.0x | $33.3M | 1–2 per year |
Change the dials and the outputs move. That is what makes it a model instead of a promise. The spreadsheet logic is deterministic; attack it.
One model, six seats at the table. The same arithmetic read from every chair, including the founders', capped at 20% and governed by a published Liquidity Dial, not a padlock.
Four cohorts sit on the allocation table. Founders, rolled legacy holders, the community, and Deal Scouts. These charts track what each one earns, 2027–2040, as buybacks, burns, vesting, and the Founder Liquidity Dial play out.
Cohort lens: full allocation-table basis: 500M shares outstanding at TGE (founders 200M, legacy 100M, community float 200M), escrow released and sold above NAV, ecosystem incentives emitted within the 200M cap, scouts vested against 1% of closed EV. Supply and burn paths differ slightly from the headline Path model because this lens carries every tranche explicitly. Distributions shown on a fully-staked basis; burns modeled as Engine purchases from willing community sellers, at NAV.
Four published rules replace the padlock. A dial anyone can read, disclosure anyone can verify, and a cap that never moves.
The fairness is the size of the allocation, not the padlock. Prior-cycle genesis tables gave insiders far more: XRP launched with roughly 80% of supply in insider hands, and BNB's 2017 genesis put 40% with the team plus 10% with angels. The winning-launch cohort averaged 54% to the community. $NPKN caps founders at 20% and the model lands the community above 62%. A founder who cannot dump what he was never over-allocated needs no padlock to prove it.
A machine that intends to recruit more founders cannot tell them their equity is frozen until the 2030s. That stifles the exact talent the 10,000-deal ambition needs. Alignment comes from three mechanisms that never turn off: the 20% cap, the public dial, and per-share economics that reward holding better than selling.
Replaces the hard Founder-Last lockups of White Paper v5.0 §5.2: formalized in White Paper v6.0 §5.2 (July 23, 2026).
The same model read four ways, 2027–2040: who holds the supply, what it is worth at modeled NAV, the founders' worst case against holding, and the cash actually delivered.
The dial is real liquidity, and holding still wins, because the burn concentrates whoever holds. Alignment by economics, not padlocks.
Four readings from the model's last row, stated the way we would want them stated to us.
Selling the maximum dial every single year, founders end 2040 holding 50.8M shares worth ~$697M, having realized ~$557M in disclosed sales and received ~$1.27B of cumulative distributions. A ~$2.5B modeled outcome from a capped 20% start.
Holding instead, founders end at ~33% ownership, because buyback-and-cancel concentrates whoever doesn't sell. That drift is exactly why the dial and the disclosure exist: the burn rewards holders, founders included, and the cap plus transparency keep it fair.
The community ends above 62% of supply in the dial scenario (higher than the 54% winning-launch average) and NAV per share is essentially unchanged whether founders sell or hold ($13.71 vs $12.11).
Deal Scouts, starting from nothing, end with a cumulative modeled outcome above $1.6B, sourcing deals on NapkinDeals.com becomes a genuine profession.
| Cohort | Shares held | Value @ NAV | Realized cash | Cumulative distributions | Ownership % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FoundersDial maxed every yearHold scenario instead: ~$6.09B total and 33.1% ownership, the burn concentrates whoever holds. | 50.8M | $697.0M | $556.8M | $1.27B | 9.5% |
| Rolled legacy holders | 100.0M | $1.37B | , | $1.90B | 18.7% |
| Community & public | 333.8M | $4.58B | $2.24B | $6.86B | 62.4% |
| Deal Scouts | 50.0M | $685.5M | , | $949.5M | 9.4% |
Cohort outcomes are model outputs under the listed assumptions, valued at modeled NAV per share. Not price predictions, not compensation promises, and not guidance. Distributions are shown on a fully-staked basis. The Founder Liquidity Dial parameters shown (10%/yr) are the modeled ceiling; final parameters are published in the token documents.
Every mechanism in this model points at one number pair: NAV per share and FCF per share. Price is what the market pays for that pair, and no honest model predicts it. Uniswap burned $596M and hit a cycle low two months later; buybacks cannot outrun beta, and anyone who charts a price curve for you is selling you one.
What the model does show: a share count that only shrinks after 2031, a NAV floor defended by funded quarterly tenders, distributions that grow three orders of magnitude, and an issuer contractually banned from diluting you below NAV. If the market ever prices $NPKN below the attested numbers on this page, the Engine's tender is the mechanical answer, and if it prices it above, treasury issuance above NAV makes every deal accretive. There is no third mode.
Most projects publish the upside and bury the stress test. We publish the stress test on the same page, with the same charts, before anyone asks.
35% fewer deals a year, FCF conversion 50% instead of 60%, organic growth 3% instead of 5%, financing slips, integration drags, markets stay hard.
The mechanisms don't break; the timeline stretches. Delay, not derailment, is the designed failure mode.
| Metric | 2032 base | 2032 downside | 2040 base | 2040 downside |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Deals | 1,000 | 656 | 10,000 | 6,528 |
| NAV/share | $1.99 | $1.46 | $18.42 | $9.47 |
| FCF/share | $1.16 | $0.50 | $17.40 | $7.55 |
DOWNSIDE 2040: 6,528 DEALS · NAV/SHARE $9.47 · STILL RISING EVERY YEAR
The Path to 10,000 is an illustrative, rule-based model published to be attacked, not a forecast, projection, or guidance. All figures CAD. Model outputs depend entirely on the listed assumptions; actual results will differ, possibly materially. 2026 figures are the management-reported run-rate basis of the dashboard; every later year is model output. Deal vignettes are illustrative and are not announcements or actual transactions. Nothing on this page is an offer of securities or a representation about the future price or value of any token; any offer of $NPKN will be made solely through an approved prospectus, offering memorandum, or applicable exemption.
Rebuild it, stress it, break it if you can. The assumptions are all here, and the mechanisms are bound in the founding document.