Had the same issue. This is what Claude 4.5 Opus gave me:

This is actually a satirical piece, written as a fake credit rating report. It's mocking how Meta (Facebook's parent company) is using a complex financial structure to keep $27 billion in debt off its official books. Here's what's actually happening in plain English: The basic setup:

Meta is building a massive $28 billion data center in Louisiana Instead of borrowing the money directly (which would show up as debt on Meta's financial statements), they created a convoluted structure with multiple shell companies and a partner called Blue Owl Capital

The trick:

On paper, Blue Owl's company "Beignet" owns 80% of the project and borrows the $27 billion But Meta still guarantees all the rent payments, covers cost overruns, and promises to pay if anything goes wrong So economically, it's Meta's debt—they're on the hook for everything—but legally it's structured so it doesn't appear on Meta's balance sheet

Why the author thinks it's absurd:

Meta controls the project, uses the buildings, guarantees all payments, and bears all the real risk The only reason it's "not Meta's debt" is a technicality in accounting rules The author is essentially saying: "This is obviously Meta borrowing $27 billion with extra steps, and everyone pretends otherwise because the rules allow it"

The whole piece is written as if a rating agency is giving this deal an A+ grade while openly admitting the structure is ridiculous—it's a critique of how financial engineering and accounting rules let big companies hide their true debt levels.

The Matt Levine article on this financing is more readable: https://news.bloomberglaw.com/mergers-and-acquisitions/matt-...

Practicing a skill when it becomes challenging is exactly how you improve the skill. Giving up on it is how you stagnate.

It's probably unreadable because you have to understand the underlying financial discussion.