Olivia
Online
UnknownBull
@CyberLeekBull
CyberLeek has no official X account. Beware of fake accounts, websites & Telegram channels. Its only official presence is its website.
Joined August 2026
0 Following
7 Followers
245 Posts
Pinned Tweet
🚨 IMPORTANT: HOW MUCH CYBERLEEK GETS FROM A $50M VOLUME
A lot of people are seriously misunderstanding the $50M volume target.
Trading volume is NOT revenue.
On the main Raydium $CYBERLEEK pool, the standard trading fee is 0.25%. But CyberLeek does not receive that entire 0.25%.
The separate 0.05% creator fee is configured but DISABLED on the $CYBERLEEK pool. So traders are not paying an additional 0.05% directly to the creator.
The creator instead holds the Fee Key for the original Raydium liquidity position. That gives the creator the fees attributable to that locked liquidity position, which represents about 98.43% of the current Raydium LP supply. The LP itself is permanently locked through Burn & Earn.
So, using the documented fee structure:
$50,000,000 volume × 0.21% LP fee × 98.43% creator LP share ≈ $103,000
So:
$50M trading volume ≠ $50M revenue
$50M trading volume ≈ ~$103K attributable fees
And even that does not mean $103K of pure profit or that the money has already been withdrawn. It is an estimate of the fees attributable to the creator's locked liquidity position, assuming the entire $50M went through that pool and the same fee structure remained in place.
There is another fact people keep ignoring:
🔥 The original 270M $CYBERLEEK allocation, around 27% of the initial 1B supply, was permanently burned on August 22, 2026.
Those 270M tokens were destroyed and cannot be sold later. The creator's $CYBERLEEK balance is now zero, while mint and freeze authorities are revoked.
So the narrative of:
“$50M volume = CyberLeek gets rich”
is simply wrong.
The crypto is a funding mechanism within a much larger operation. Security, infrastructure, hardware, development, research, privacy-focused communications and multiple people working on a long-term operation all cost money.
People are confusing how much money is traded with how much money the project actually receives.
The leaks are the tool, not the purpose. GTA VI is the beginning, not the end.
#CYBERLEEK #GTA6
That assumes CyberLeek’s relevance comes only from showing GTA VI footage before Rockstar does, but that’s not the case.
The Extended Look will show a controlled presentation of the game, with Rockstar deciding exactly what they want the public to see. A leaked build is something completely different.
The build CyberLeek has shown is claimed to be extremely recent, meaning the discussion does not simply disappear after an official reveal. A preview can show polished gameplay, but it does not erase the fact that there is still a large amount of content, systems and details that Rockstar has not shown publicly.
And there is still the biggest factor people ignore: the possibility of releasing the playable build itself. That would be a completely different level of impact compared to individual clips, and it remains a powerful pressure point.
GTA VI is one of the biggest entertainment launches in history. Rockstar can control its marketing, but it cannot control the curiosity created once people know more exists.
The Extended Look will show what Rockstar wants people to see. CyberLeek’s position comes from having access to something far beyond a few trailers.
One official presentation does not automatically make CyberLeek irrelevant. The conversation has already moved beyond a simple leak.
You know what I think, I think bro dropping all he can before that extended look drops because his build whatever he shows after that becomes invalid, it’s only good now because there’s nothing to compare it to, the moment we see what it officially will look like, nothing he shows after would be of any significance
That assumes CyberLeek’s relevance comes only from showing GTA VI footage before Rockstar does, but that’s not the case.
The Extended Look will show a controlled presentation of the game, with Rockstar deciding exactly what they want the public to see. A leaked build is something completely different.
The build CyberLeek has shown is claimed to be extremely recent, meaning the discussion does not simply disappear after an official reveal. A preview can show polished gameplay, but it does not erase the fact that there is still a large amount of content, systems and details that Rockstar has not shown publicly.
And there is still the biggest factor people ignore: the possibility of releasing the playable build itself. That would be a completely different level of impact compared to individual clips, and it remains a powerful pressure point.
GTA VI is one of the biggest entertainment launches in history. Rockstar can control its marketing, but it cannot control the curiosity created once people know more exists.
The Extended Look will show what Rockstar wants people to see. CyberLeek’s position comes from having access to something far beyond a few trailers.
One official presentation does not automatically make CyberLeek irrelevant. The conversation has already moved beyond a simple leak.
People are acting like “nearly finished” means “there is nothing left to do”, and that’s simply not how AAA development works.
Reaching gold status is one of the most demanding phases of development. A game can be close to release while still requiring massive amounts of optimisation, bug fixing, performance testing, certification and final polishing.
A recent build showing unfinished elements would not automatically contradict Rockstar saying they are “nearly there”. Those two things can exist at the same time. A development build is a snapshot of a specific moment, not the final retail version players will receive.
The real question is not “is GTA VI finished or unfinished?” The question is how much work remains and how much pressure is being put on the teams during these final stages.
People are also missing the wider point CyberLeek is trying to make. This is not simply about saying “GTA VI is bad” or attacking developers. The discussion is about the working conditions behind massive AAA productions and the direction the industry is taking.
A game can be one of the most anticipated releases in history and still have serious issues behind the scenes that deserve discussion.
The conversation is bigger than one leaked build.
You’re focusing only on the price chart and ignoring the actual point.
A token moving down after a huge wave of attention does not automatically prove anything. That is normal market behaviour, especially after a massive speculative run.
The bigger mistake is assuming that CyberLeek’s entire purpose is just “pump the coin”. The funding mechanism exists because keeping an operation running requires resources. The question is not whether people like the method, but whether the project has a way to continue operating.
Also, “more volume = CyberLeek gets rich” is simply wrong. Volume is not revenue. The amount traded and the amount actually received through fees are completely different things.
You can criticize the prologue leak. You can say you don’t want spoilers. That’s a valid opinion.
But saying “the hype looks different now, therefore the whole thing failed” is just reading a short-term chart and ignoring the bigger conversation around ownership, consumer rights, worker conditions and the future of gaming.
Judge the arguments, not just the candle chart.
It’s interesting how quickly the conversation changed. For years fans were asking Rockstar for more communication, more transparency and a closer connection with the community. Now, after the leaks forced the issue into the spotlight, Rockstar has finally addressed the situation directly and spoken more openly with players.
That doesn’t mean developers deserve hate. The people working on GTA VI put years of effort into the game and deserve respect.
But this is exactly why the bigger conversation matters. CyberLeek was never just about showing clips. The leaks became a pressure point that forced discussions about ownership, consumer rights, worker conditions and how the industry communicates with players.
You can appreciate Rockstar’s response and still question the bigger system around modern gaming.
Sometimes it takes massive public attention for billion-dollar companies to truly listen.
If you want to avoid spoilers, that’s completely fair. Everyone should be able to experience GTA VI the way they want.
But the conversation shouldn’t stop at “a leak happened”. The reason this became such a major event is because it goes beyond a few clips. CyberLeek is using the attention around the biggest game release in history to push a wider discussion about ownership, consumer rights, worker rights and the direction of the industry.
You can disagree with the method, and you can choose not to watch anything. That’s your choice. But reducing the entire situation to “someone ruining GTA VI” ignores the bigger argument behind it.
The leaks are the tool, not the purpose.
People are assuming “Rockstar said nearly finished” automatically means CyberLeek must be lying. That’s a very simplistic way to look at game development.
A game being close to completion and a game still requiring an enormous amount of work before going gold are not contradictory statements.
Anyone familiar with AAA development knows the final phase is often the most intense: optimisation, bug fixing, performance testing, certification and final polishing. A project can be close to release while teams are still under huge pressure.
A leaked build is also only a snapshot of development at a specific point in time. It does not automatically represent the final retail version players will receive.
The bigger misunderstanding is the idea that CyberLeek’s message is simply “GTA VI is bad” or “developers are the enemy.” That is not the argument being made. The discussion is about the wider industry: ownership, resale rights, worker conditions and consumer power.
As for the funding side, people keep assuming it’s just about “asking for money”. Maintaining infrastructure, security, development and a long-term operation requires resources. A funding mechanism is not the same thing as the purpose behind it.
You can disagree with the method, but saying “Rockstar said nearly finished, therefore everything CyberLeek said is impossible” ignores how game development actually works.
The leaks are the tool, not the purpose. The conversation is bigger than one build of GTA VI.
People are focusing only on the fact that a leak happened and ignoring the actual message behind it.
The argument is not “developers are the enemy” or “we want to ruin GTA VI”. The point CyberLeek is trying to raise is about the direction of the industry: ownership, resale rights, physical media, consumer rights and worker conditions.
Also, people are misunderstanding the “game is not ready” statement. Rockstar saying the game is “nearly finished” does not automatically mean there is no huge amount of work left. The final stages of a AAA game are often the most intense: optimisation, bug fixing, certification, performance testing and polishing. A game can be close to release while teams are still under enormous pressure.
A recent build showing unfinished elements would not be surprising either. A development build is a snapshot of a specific moment, not the final version players will receive.
The money argument is also constantly misunderstood. Funding an operation like this requires resources. Infrastructure, security, development and maintaining the project all cost money. The token is a funding mechanism, not the entire purpose.
People keep seeing “crypto” and immediately jumping to “scam” without looking at how it works. The original 270M $CYBERLEEK allocation was burned instead of being kept as a huge supply that could later be dumped.
You can disagree with the method, but pretending the only motivation is “ruining GTA VI” ignores the bigger conversation.
The leaks are the tool, not the purpose. GTA VI is the beginning, not the end.
But calling this only “awful for developers and fans” ignores the bigger discussion that started all of this.
CyberLeek’s message is not about attacking developers. The argument is about the industry as a whole: ownership, consumer rights, worker conditions and the direction gaming is moving toward.
You can disagree with the method, but reducing everything to “someone wants to ruin GTA VI” ignores the reason this became such a major conversation.
The leaks are the tool, not the purpose.
This is another example of people reducing the entire situation to “he wants money” without understanding how the system works.
The $50M figure is trading volume, not money CyberLeek receives. Those are completely different things. Volume measures how much is traded, not how much goes to the project.
Under the current pool structure, even if $50M of volume went through the main pool, the fees attributable to the creator’s locked liquidity position would only be around $103K, not $50M and not some unlimited payout.
Also, the funding mechanism is not the same as simply asking people to send money to a wallet. A token creates a transparent way to measure community support and activity, while allowing the project to fund infrastructure and continue operating.
Could CyberLeek simply stop? Yes. Any operation that requires time, resources and people needs support to continue.
You can disagree with the leaks or choose not to watch them. That is completely fair. But saying “he is squeezing everything possible out of it” ignores the bigger picture and assumes motives without evidence.
The leaks are the tool, not the purpose. The bigger conversation is about ownership, consumer rights, worker rights and the future of gaming.
The GTA 6 leaker is now asking for $50 MILLION in trading volume while teasing another gameplay leak showing a bus on the beach and police.
With GTA 6 ‘An Extended Look’ premiering tomorrow, Cyberleek is trying to squeeze as much as possible out of the leaks.
This is another example of people reducing the entire situation to “he wants money” without understanding how the system works.
The $50M figure is trading volume, not money CyberLeek receives. Those are completely different things. Volume measures how much is traded, not how much goes to the project.
Under the current pool structure, even if $50M of volume went through the main pool, the fees attributable to the creator’s locked liquidity position would only be around $103K, not $50M and not some unlimited payout.
Also, the funding mechanism is not the same as simply asking people to send money to a wallet. A token creates a transparent way to measure community support and activity, while allowing the project to fund infrastructure and continue operating.
Could CyberLeek simply stop? Yes. Any operation that requires time, resources and people needs support to continue.
You can disagree with the leaks or choose not to watch them. That is completely fair. But saying “he is squeezing everything possible out of it” ignores the bigger picture and assumes motives without evidence.
The leaks are the tool, not the purpose. The bigger conversation is about ownership, consumer rights, worker rights and the future of gaming.
People are looking at this from a very shallow perspective.
CyberLeek is not saying “the developers are the enemy”. That is not the point. The argument is about an industry where developers are pushed under extreme pressure while players are also losing control over what they buy.
Rockstar saying the game is “nearly finished” does not automatically disprove what CyberLeek said. Anyone who understands AAA development knows the final stages before gold can be some of the most demanding: optimisation, bug fixing, performance testing, certification and polishing. A game can be close to completion and still require a huge amount of work.
The leaked build being unfinished is also not surprising. Development builds are snapshots of a specific moment, not the final release.
The other thing people misunderstand is the money aspect. Supporting an operation like this requires resources. Infrastructure, security, development, research and maintaining the project all cost money. It is not simply “asking people for cash because he wants a reward”.
And the way the project is funded is completely different from someone just posting a wallet address and asking people to send money. A token creates a public, transparent system where community support can be measured through activity and participation. Nobody is forced to buy anything.
People keep confusing a funding mechanism with the entire purpose of the project.
The biggest misunderstanding is thinking this is only about ruining GTA VI. The leaks are the pressure tool, not the purpose.
The wider discussion is about ownership, resale rights, physical media, worker conditions and the future direction of gaming.
You can disagree with the method, but pretending the only message is “someone wants to hurt developers” ignores the reason this became such a big conversation.
GTA VI is the beginning, not the end.
Cyberleek has written a message on his latest GTA 6 leaked clips that contains the story prolouge [NO SPOILERS for this Tweet]
It reads as following:
“This build is actually recent, and the game is not ready at all.
Sony and Rockstar are killing your right to own and resell your games and Rockstar is killing their own employees too.
The work required to reach gold is way too much for so little time left. Trading volume/price is how CL measures your support.
CL will not continue without support. You decide.”
Its insane how this guy is trying to make you feel bad for the developers whilst he’s the one who has been constantly leaking clips of an unfinished product tarnishing their work and he’s asking everyone to send him money in the process to show him support?
The leaks that have been leaked so far showed that GTA 6 is not finished and even Rockstar Games themselves have confirmed today that GTA 6 is still in development and they’re nearly there.
People are looking at this from a very shallow perspective.
CyberLeek is not saying “the developers are the enemy”. That is not the point. The argument is about an industry where developers are pushed under extreme pressure while players are also losing control over what they buy.
Rockstar saying the game is “nearly finished” does not automatically disprove what CyberLeek said. Anyone who understands AAA development knows the final stages before gold can be some of the most demanding: optimisation, bug fixing, performance testing, certification and polishing. A game can be close to completion and still require a huge amount of work.
The leaked build being unfinished is also not surprising. Development builds are snapshots of a specific moment, not the final release.
The other thing people misunderstand is the money aspect. Supporting an operation like this requires resources. Infrastructure, security, development, research and maintaining the project all cost money. It is not simply “asking people for cash because he wants a reward”.
And the way the project is funded is completely different from someone just posting a wallet address and asking people to send money. A token creates a public, transparent system where community support can be measured through activity and participation. Nobody is forced to buy anything.
People keep confusing a funding mechanism with the entire purpose of the project.
The biggest misunderstanding is thinking this is only about ruining GTA VI. The leaks are the pressure tool, not the purpose.
The wider discussion is about ownership, resale rights, physical media, worker conditions and the future direction of gaming.
You can disagree with the method, but pretending the only message is “someone wants to hurt developers” ignores the reason this became such a big conversation.
GTA VI is the beginning, not the end.
People are misunderstanding what was actually said here.
Rockstar saying the game is “nearly there” does not automatically contradict CyberLeek’s statement. “Nearly finished” and “ready for launch” are not the same thing. The final stages of a AAA game are often the most demanding: optimisation, bug fixing, certification, performance testing and polishing can require enormous amounts of work.
A recent build showing unfinished elements would not be surprising. Development builds are snapshots of a specific moment, not a direct representation of the final release state.
The mistake people are making is assuming there is only one possible reality: either Rockstar is right or CyberLeek is lying. In reality, both statements can exist at the same time.
A game can be close to completion while still requiring a huge amount of work before it reaches gold status.
The real question is not whether GTA VI is “finished” or “unfinished”. The question is how much work remains and how the final weeks of development are being managed.
Cyberleek shared a new message in the latest GTA 6 clip, claiming the build they have is recent:
“This build is actually recent and the game is not ready at all.
Sony and Rockstar are killing your right to own and resell your games and Rockstar is killing their own employees too, the work required to reach gold is way too much for so little time left. Trading volume/price is how CL measures your support. CL will not continue without support. You decide.”
What Cyberleek is saying here doesn’t make sense and he could be lying, as Rockstar just confirmed in today’s statement that the game is almost finished:
“We are very sorry that everything has taken as long as it has - from getting the game finished (nearly there!)”
People are misunderstanding what was actually said here.
Rockstar saying the game is “nearly there” does not automatically contradict CyberLeek’s statement. “Nearly finished” and “ready for launch” are not the same thing. The final stages of a AAA game are often the most demanding: optimisation, bug fixing, certification, performance testing and polishing can require enormous amounts of work.
A recent build showing unfinished elements would not be surprising. Development builds are snapshots of a specific moment, not a direct representation of the final release state.
The mistake people are making is assuming there is only one possible reality: either Rockstar is right or CyberLeek is lying. In reality, both statements can exist at the same time.
A game can be close to completion while still requiring a huge amount of work before it reaches gold status.
The real question is not whether GTA VI is “finished” or “unfinished”. The question is how much work remains and how the final weeks of development are being managed.
Respecting people who want to stay spoiler-free is fair. Everyone should experience GTA VI the way they want.
But reducing CyberLeek to “just spoilers” misses the bigger picture. The leaks are the method, not the entire purpose. The wider discussion is about ownership, consumer rights, worker rights and the direction of the gaming industry.
You can disagree with the approach, but there is clearly a bigger conversation behind it.
People are looking at this only from the spoiler side and missing the bigger picture.
If you don’t want spoilers, that’s fair. Mute keywords, avoid the leaks and enjoy GTA VI the way you want.
But reducing everything to “CyberLeek just wants to ruin the game” ignores the reason this gained attention in the first place. The leaks are the method being used to create pressure and bring attention to issues like ownership, consumer rights, worker rights and where the gaming industry is heading.
You can disagree with the approach, but pretending there is nothing else behind it is ignoring the whole point.
The leaks are the tool, not the purpose.
But it’s important not to reduce everything to “someone ruining GTA VI”. The leaks are the tool, not the purpose.
CyberLeek is using the biggest gaming event in history to bring attention to a broader discussion about consumer rights, ownership, worker rights and the future direction of the industry.
You can disagree with the method, especially when it involves story content, while still understanding the bigger conversation behind it.
GTA VI is bigger than just one leak. The reason this has created so much attention is because millions of players care about what the future of gaming will look like.
Reducing everything to “he leaked the prologue to pump his shitcoin” is a very simplistic take.
First, the idea that the token price moving down proves the motivation behind the leaks is speculation. Crypto markets are volatile, especially with small-cap projects. A price movement alone does not prove someone’s intentions.
Second, if this was only about making money, there would be far easier ways to do it than running a high-profile operation under massive attention and scrutiny.
The token is a funding mechanism, not the entire purpose.
The original 270M $CYBERLEEK allocation, around 27% of the initial supply, was permanently burned, removing those tokens from circulation instead of keeping a massive allocation that could later be dumped on holders.
And people keep misunderstanding the economics. Trading volume is not the same as revenue.
Even $50M in trading volume does not mean CyberLeek receives $50M. Under the current pool structure, if the full $50M went through the main Raydium pool, the fees attributable to the creator’s locked liquidity position would be approximately $103K, which is around 0.2% of the total trading volume.
That is a small fraction of the volume, not some unlimited money machine.
You can disagree with releasing story content. You can choose not to watch spoilers. That is completely fair.
But pretending the only motivation is “pump the coin” ignores the broader message CyberLeek has been pushing about ownership, consumer rights, worker rights and the direction of the gaming industry.
The leaks are the tool, not the purpose.
Cyberleek just published the GTA 6 prologue as the last resort to pump his shitcoin, which is currently collapsing following Rockstar’s statement.
Do not watch it if you still want to get the full experience at launch.
Reducing everything to “he leaked the prologue to pump his shitcoin” is a very simplistic take.
First, the idea that the token price moving down proves the motivation behind the leaks is speculation. Crypto markets are volatile, especially with small-cap projects. A price movement alone does not prove someone’s intentions.
Second, if this was only about making money, there would be far easier ways to do it than running a high-profile operation under massive attention and scrutiny.
The token is a funding mechanism, not the entire purpose.
The original 270M $CYBERLEEK allocation, around 27% of the initial supply, was permanently burned, removing those tokens from circulation instead of keeping a massive allocation that could later be dumped on holders.
And people keep misunderstanding the economics. Trading volume is not the same as revenue.
Even $50M in trading volume does not mean CyberLeek receives $50M. Under the current pool structure, if the full $50M went through the main Raydium pool, the fees attributable to the creator’s locked liquidity position would be approximately $103K, which is around 0.2% of the total trading volume.
That is a small fraction of the volume, not some unlimited money machine.
You can disagree with releasing story content. You can choose not to watch spoilers. That is completely fair.
But pretending the only motivation is “pump the coin” ignores the broader message CyberLeek has been pushing about ownership, consumer rights, worker rights and the direction of the gaming industry.
The leaks are the tool, not the purpose.
Last Seen Users on Sotwe
ünlüler ve güzeller
Seen from Turkey
Ebony Nation
Seen from Sweden
⚧ TRANS HUB ⚧ 170K ⚧
Seen from Turkey
Furness Gamby
Seen from United States
gggyfrtuj
Mauyri Estefany
Seen from United Kingdom
Bollywood Actress 🥵
Seen from Netherlands
sachin
Seen from India
Muscle Bear Porn
Seen from Germany
Natalia
Most Popular Users
Elon Musk
@elonmusk
241.5M followers
Barack Obama
@barackobama
119.1M followers
Cristiano Ronaldo
@cristiano
113.8M followers
Donald J. Trump
@realdonaldtrump
111.8M followers
Narendra Modi
@narendramodi
107.2M followers
Rihanna
@rihanna
98.6M followers
NASA
@nasa
92.4M followers
Justin Bieber
@justinbieber
91.7M followers
KATY PERRY
@katyperry
89.6M followers
Taylor Swift
@taylorswift13
83.5M followers
Lady Gaga
@ladygaga
75M followers
Virat Kohli
@imvkohli
72.8M followers
Kim Kardashian
@kimkardashian
70.7M followers
YouTube
@youtube
68.8M followers
Neymar Jr
@neymarjr
65.7M followers
Bill Gates
@billgates
64.9M followers
Selena Gomez
@selenagomez
62.7M followers
The Ellen Show
@theellenshow
62.3M followers
CNN
@cnn
61.8M followers
X
@x
60.8M followers