You've seen this movie before.
A company with "revolutionary" technology, a name nobody can pronounce, promises that stretch out to 2040, and a SPAC deal — that structure Wall Street invented to take companies public without going through the tedious scrutiny of a traditional IPO. Sprinkle "quantum computing" in the title and boom: the social media algorithms are already working overtime, the finance influencers are already recording their Reels, and retail investors are already drooling.
IQM Quantum Computers, a Finnish company founded in 2018, has announced it will go public in the United States through a SPAC valued at approximately $1.8 billion. The vehicle in question is Transition Capital Corp. And that, my friend, is where things get interesting.
First, let's talk about the elephant in the room: what the hell is a SPAC?
SPAC — Special Purpose Acquisition Company — is basically a shell. A facade company that raises money on the stock market with the promise of finding a real company to buy. It's the "blank check" of capital markets.
In 2020 and 2021, the SPAC market turned into a full-blown circus. Hundreds of companies went public this way — many with no real revenue, no validated product, sometimes not even a customer. The result? Most of them crashed hard. Some SPACs lost 70%, 80% of their value after the merger. The SEC started cracking down. The hype died.
And now, in 2025, SPACs are back. Except this time with quantum technology. Because if there's one thing the market loves more than a good story, it's a good story that nobody quite understands.
Quantum computing: genuinely brilliant or just lab hype?
Look, quantum computing is real. The physical foundations exist. The research is serious. Companies like IBM, Google, and startups around the world are pouring billions into it.
The problem isn't the technology. The problem is the timing and the valuation.
IQM has contracts with European governments, partnerships with research institutions, and has already delivered actual quantum computers — unlike many companies in the sector that only deliver PowerPoint presentations. That's a point in their favor.
But a $1.8 billion valuation for a company operating in a market that's still in pre-commercial scale? Here you need to ask the question Nassim Taleb always asks: who has skin in the game here?
The SPAC founders who created Transition Capital? They win either way — that's the structure of the deal. If it works out, great. If it doesn't, they've already pocketed their fees and moved on with their lives. The retail investor who bought in all excited? That's the guy left holding the bag.
I'm not saying IQM is a fraud. I'm saying: watch out for the vehicle.
Bruce Wayne used sophisticated tools. But in the wrong hands, the same tool becomes a weapon. SPACs aren't inherently bad — but they have a recent track record that should embarrass anyone when it comes to protecting retail investors.
Warren Buffett has never touched a SPAC in his life. Buffett, who buys companies on a regular basis. Who has more access to deals than any living human being. He passed. Maybe he knows something that the finance YouTubers aren't telling you.
The big question here isn't whether quantum computing will change the world — it probably will. The question is: are you going to profit from it? Or are you going to be the guy who bought Netscape in 1999 and waited around for the internet to "really arrive"?
What should a serious investor actually do?
First: understand what you're buying. Not the pitch deck, not the YouTube video. The actual business model, current revenues, the burn rate, who the paying customers are — not just academic partners.
Second: understand the specific SPAC structure. What are the redemption terms? What's the sponsor promote? How much dilution is coming down the road?
Third: size your position accordingly. If you want exposure to quantum computing, there's this thing called diversification. IBM, Honeywell, IonQ (which also went public via SPAC and has had a mixed performance) — there's more than one door in.
Future technology wrapped in a questionable financial vehicle from the past.
That's the summary.
IQM might be legit. The technology might be promising. But financial markets have a supernatural talent for taking something genuinely good and turning it into a wealth-destruction machine for anyone who didn't read the fine print.
Are you going to be the sharp one who spotted the opportunity before everyone else — or just another sucker who bankrolled someone else's exit?
The answer depends on how much you actually know about what you're buying.
