How to capture growth AND income in 2026’s surging orbital economy. April 16th, 2026, 2PM ET. Click Here to register

 I wrote about this topic a few months ago and was on the Compound a while back talking about it…..

 Starting to see some more activity here so wanted to do an update…..

THE GOSPEL: EUROPE TALKS, AMERICA IGNORES, NOTHING CHANGES

The consensus view on European technology policy has been remarkably stable for the better part of a decade: European regulators write angry letters, legislate ambitious frameworks, impose fines that amount to rounding errors on hyperscaler balance sheets, and ultimately continue buying American software because nothing credible exists to replace it. GDPR reshaped cookie banners. The AI Act generated enormous commentary. The Digital Markets Act generated enormous commentary. The underlying procurement reality did not change.

 And the skeptics had history on their side. In 2003, the city of Munich — Germany's third-largest — launched LiMux, an ambitious program to migrate 15,000 city employees from Windows to Linux and from Microsoft Office to open-source alternatives. A decade later, in 2017, Munich abandoned the program and migrated back to Windows, citing productivity losses, software incompatibility, and internal political pressure. The failure became a cautionary tale that has been cited in every subsequent European open-source initiative as proof that the switching costs are too high and the political will too fragile.

 We think the Munich analogy, while instructive, misdiagnoses the current moment — because the driver this time is fundamentally different. Munich's LiMux was a cost-reduction exercise. What is happening across European governments today is not driven by the price of software licenses. It is driven by the legal architecture of data control. And that is a much harder thing to reverse.

THE CRACK IN THE GOSPEL: THE INVOICE IS THE EVIDENCE

The proof that this cycle is different from prior waves of European sovereignty ambition is not found in policy papers. It is found in signed contracts and active migrations across every layer of the technology stack. Consider what is underway right now:

 The Desktop and Productivity Layer

Germany's state of Schleswig-Holstein, with approximately 25,000 state employees, has publicly laid out a migration path away from Microsoft Office toward LibreOffice and away from Windows toward Linux. This is a published, committed government policy with an implementation timeline — not a study or a pilot. The city of Lyon in France is migrating municipal operations to a combination of PostgreSQL, Linux, and OnlyOffice. The International Criminal Court — an institution handling the most sensitive legal proceedings on the planet — has replaced Microsoft Office with openDesk, the European open-source collaboration suite. These are not fringe municipalities running experiments. They are government bodies with explicit sovereignty mandates making irreversible procurement decisions.

 The Military Communications Layer

BWI — the Bundeswehr's IT organization, which handles information technology for Germany's approximately 183,000 active-duty personnel — has signed a formal framework agreement with ZenDiS covering openDesk and openCode, the German government's sovereign open-source collaboration and development platform. This is a framework agreement, meaning it establishes the commercial and technical terms under which sovereign software can be procured across the military IT infrastructure. It is a significant institutional commitment, not a final completed rollout — but framework agreements at this level are how large-scale government technology transitions actually begin.

 The Cloud Infrastructure Layer

Airbus, Europe's largest aerospace and defense company, is migrating critical and sensitive assets from foreign cloud providers to a dedicated European sovereign cloud. France's Health Data Hub — the national repository for patient records covering tens of millions of French citizens — has formally exited Microsoft Azure and contracted with a European cloud provider. The Netherlands Parliament has passed a formal resolution urging the government to build its own National Cloud infrastructure. These represent three distinct categories of motivation: a defense contractor protecting classified program data, a government health authority protecting patient data under GDPR, and a national legislature protecting democratic process data. Different institutions, same direction of travel.

 The Payments Layer

The Eurozone is advancing two parallel initiatives to reduce dependence on Visa and Mastercard's American-owned payment rails. Wero — launched by the European Payments Initiative, a consortium of major European banks including BNP Paribas, Deutsche Bank, ING, and Société Générale — is now live in France, Germany, and Belgium, with additional market rollouts underway. The European Central Bank continues to advance the digital euro project toward a potential 2027–2028 deployment decision. These are different instruments — one a private consortium wallet, one a central bank digital currency — but both are motivated by the same strategic concern: that routing European consumer transactions through American-headquartered card networks creates a jurisdiction dependency that European policymakers are no longer willing to treat as acceptable.

THE MECHANISM: WHY THIS TIME THE DRIVER IS LEGAL, NOT FINANCIAL

Every sophisticated reader of European technology policy will remember Munich. And they should — LiMux's failure is a genuine and relevant data point about the difficulty of large-scale open-source migrations. But the analogy breaks down on its most important dimension: Munich switched for cost reasons. When the cost-benefit analysis shifted, the political will evaporated and the migration reversed.

The current wave of European digital sovereignty procurement is not driven by cost. It is driven by jurisdiction risk — and jurisdiction risk does not go away when a new administration takes office in Washington, or when a trade deal is signed, or when a vendor offers a better price. It is a permanent feature of the legal architecture.

The mechanism is the U.S. CLOUD Act of 2018. Under that law, U.S.-headquartered cloud providers are required to produce data stored on their servers in response to U.S. law enforcement requests — regardless of where those servers physically sit. An Azure server in a Frankfurt data center is still subject to U.S. legal process. An OVHcloud server in the same Frankfurt facility is not. For most enterprise customers, this is an abstract compliance footnote. For a national military communications system, a national health data repository, a war crimes court, or a government ministry handling confidential EU policy deliberations, it is an existential sovereignty question.

This is why the current cycle is structurally different from Munich. Munich was reversible because cost is reversible. Jurisdiction risk is not reversible by changing a vendor's pricing. European procurement officials are not asking "can we afford the switching cost?" They are asking "can we afford the legal exposure?" Those are different questions with different thresholds for reversal.

Winners: Positioned Across the Sovereignty Stack

Pressure Points: American Technology Under Structural Pressure

5 KEY TAKEAWAYS

•         This is procurement, not protest. The evidence is in signed contracts and active migrations — Bundeswehr framework agreements, French Health Data Hub Azure exit, ICC openDesk deployment, Schleswig-Holstein Linux blueprint. The question is scale and pace, not whether the trend is real.

•         The driver is legal architecture, not software cost. Munich switched for cost reasons and reversed when costs shifted. The current wave is driven by CLOUD Act jurisdiction risk — a structural legal reality that no vendor pricing change, trade deal, or diplomatic improvement can resolve. That is what makes this cycle durable.

•         The open-source layer is free; the services layer is the trade. LibreOffice and Linux are not investable. The integrators, managed services firms, and sovereign cloud operators that migrate, harden, and run these systems at government scale are. Capgemini, T-Systems, and OVHcloud are the picks-and-shovels plays.

•         European listings mean information asymmetry. The most direct beneficiaries — OVHcloud, Capgemini, Worldline, Eviden — trade on European exchanges with limited U.S. analyst coverage. Names with U.S. ADR access (Deutsche Telekom as DTEGY, SAP as SAP) offer a lower-friction entry point. The coverage gap is part of the opportunity.

•         The sovereignty stack model is the mental map. Think desktop/productivity → cloud infrastructure → payments rails. Europe is working down that stack methodically, layer by layer. Each completed layer makes the next migration politically easier and commercially more inevitable. This is a multi-year replatforming cycle, not a single procurement event.

Europe talked about digital sovereignty for a decade. Now it is signing contracts. The story is not that Europe hates Microsoft — it is that Europe is rewriting procurement requirements so that American legal jurisdiction becomes a disqualifying factor for a growing category of sensitive workloads. That is not a headline. That is a decade-long replatforming cycle. And U.S. investors are almost entirely not watching it.

The Short Clock Is Geopolitical. The Long Clock Is Disclosure. Both Are Ticking.

Most defense funds only make sense while the war is on. UFOD is built around two separate reasons to own it; near-term defense spending and a multi-year push in Congress around Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena. We've put them together in a single portfolio.

See the UFOD holdings:  [thetruthisoutthereufod.com]

THE NOISE

Markets are celebrating a ceasefire. The S&P is up 3%, oil is down 15%, and every headline is screaming relief rally. Funds that were record short are now panic-covering, which is really what's driving this move more than any genuine resolution. The VIX is collapsing, sentiment flipped from extreme fear to cautious optimism in 48 hours, and the talking heads are debating whether Trump "won" or "lost" the Iran standoff.

THE SIGNAL

The ceasefire changes the tape, not the fundamentals. Iran still controls the Strait. Transactions are being settled in yuan and crypto, not dollars. Uranium enrichment is still on the table. The two-week window is a political off-ramp for Trump's approval ratings, not a peace deal — and the market knows it, which is why crude's back end didn't collapse the way the front month did. Meanwhile, the real trade hiding under all this geopolitical noise is in semis and memory. KOSPI up 7%, Hynix up 16%, Kioxia up 19% — the ceasefire bid went straight to the highest-beta names in the chip supply chain. MU, LRCX, SNDK, and semi-cap names are where the smart money is expressing the relief trade, not the S&P. Stay focused on hard assets and the names tied to the capex supercycle. The inflation impulse from a toll-booth Strait isn't going away — it's just getting deferred.

Oil is back up the morning, the market is red. Yesterday may have been an opportunity to add to energy stocks.

Houston, We’re Charting A Course Towards The Space Economy

From satellite broadband to lunar access, the space sector is accelerating fast.

 SPCI is a fund designed to offer access to the modern space economy. 

We combine concentrated exposure to space leaders like Planet Labs (2.22%) and AST SpaceMobile (2.32%) with an actively managed put credit spread options strategy. 

We aim to provide investors exposure to the space theme without sacrificing potential weekly income. 

Learn more about SPCI.

Distributor: Foreside Fund Services | Investing involves risk including possible loss of principle.

Holdings as of March April 5, 2026

$MEMY Holdings Update:

We replaced $NFLX ( ▼ 1.66% ) $ZM ( ▲ 6.48% ) and added $OXY ( ▼ 3.09% ) $CF ( ▼ 1.22% ) All 5% positions.


For a full list of MEMY holdings, visit:

https://incomeblastetfs.com/etf/memy

Distributor: Foreside Fund Services, LLC

Today’s stock is $OXY ( ▼ 3.09% )

Undercut and rally at the March 12 lows.

I had the pleasure of talking to Dividend Degenerates on why I like put spreads better than covered calls for income…..

The H.E.A.T. (Hedge, Edge, Asymmetry and Theme) Formula is designed to empower investors to spot opportunities, think independently, make smarter (often contrarian) moves, and build real wealth.

The views and opinions expressed herein are those of the Chief Executive Officer and Portfolio Manager for Tuttle Capital Management (TCM) and are subject to change without notice. The data and information provided is derived from sources deemed to be reliable but we cannot guarantee its accuracy. Investing in securities is subject to risk including the possible loss of principal. Trade notifications are for informational purposes only. TCM offers fully transparent ETFs and provides trade information for all actively managed ETFs. TCM's statements are not an endorsement of any company or a recommendation to buy, sell or hold any security. Trade notification files are not provided until full trade execution at the end of a trading day. The time stamp of the email is the time of file upload and not necessarily the exact time of the trades. TCM is not a commodity trading advisor and content provided regarding commodity interests is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as a recommendation. Investment recommendations for any securities or product may be made only after a comprehensive suitability review of the investor’s financial situation.© 2026 Tuttle Capital Management, LLC (TCM). TCM is a SEC-Registered Investment Adviser. All rights reserved.