W.R. Berkley and Berkley Insurance Report 148,908 Shares (5.1%) in DT Cloud
Rhea-AI Filing Summary
W.R. Berkley Corporation and Berkley Insurance Company report shared beneficial ownership of 148,908 ordinary shares of DT Cloud Acquisition Corporation, representing 5.1% of the class. The filing shows no sole voting or dispositive power; all voting and disposition authority is shared. The reported percentage is calculated using the issuer's publicly stated outstanding share counts and redemption figures, which the filing cites as the basis for the 5.1% figure.
The filers certify the securities were acquired and are held in the ordinary course of business and explicitly state they were not acquired to change or influence control of the issuer.
Positive
- Material disclosure of a >5% position (148,908 shares) provides transparency to the market
- Certification that the shares are held in the ordinary course and not to influence control
- Detailed power breakdown showing 0 sole power and 148,908 shared voting and dispositive power
Negative
- None.
Insights
TL;DR: W.R. Berkley discloses a passive, >5% position of 148,908 shares (5.1%), reported as shared power, not an attempt to control DYCQU.
The Schedule 13G shows 148,908 shares and a 5.1% stake, with 0 sole voting and 148,908 shared voting/dispositive power. That classification and the signed certification indicate a passive investment held in the ordinary course, consistent with Rule 13d-1(b) style disclosures. For investors, this is material as a >5% holder disclosure but not a control signal; it documents ownership concentration and voting alignment that could matter in shareholder votes.
TL;DR: The filing documents material ownership while affirming no intent to influence control; governance implications are limited absent coordinating agreements.
The report identifies both a parent entity and its insurance subsidiary as reporting persons with identical 148,908 shared votes and dispositive rights. The certification explicitly denies acquisition for control purposes. From a governance standpoint, the key takeaways are transparency of a >5% holder and that the holder claims passive posture; absent additional disclosures of agreements or coordinated actors, this does not by itself raise change-of-control concerns.