Many asked what my opinion on solana:9cRCn9rGT8V2imeM2BaKs13yhMEais3ruM3rPvTGpump coin
Even tho i missed it, was offline
Any coin going up to crazy valuation is net positive for the space, especially when you had no big runners in last few months
It is a liquidity creation event and actually bring back liquidity and people trading other coins on-chain
You should absolutely rooting for success of it, not other way around
Besides this, market feels bottomed and very healthy compared to last few months of pain only
We are entering a phase where easy mode comes again and you make money buying anything that makes sense
If you survived until this point, great things are ahead of you
Bulls in charge
The Big Beef cartel has a chokehold on your steak night. 🥩
Four big packers run the show.
President Trump is launching a DOJ probe and reviving real competition.
@VALRdotcom As a South African, I think this exchange is just nonsense. more the 2 days waiting for my on Ramp fiat, after making an immediate payment with my bank🤔
its in moment like this, of self doubt, hesitation, regrets and pain
that you grow into a fearless, self sufficient and confident-that-i-can-make-it-all-back-even-if-i-lose-it-all person
I have a deeply unpopular opinion about coins that no one would like to hear, and here it is:
- This relates greatly to all my tweets over the past few days. If you notice, I started being "less fundamentals" and less "intellectual masturbation". People have dm'ed me about this, asking me what changed, why my style seems to have changed so much
- To start with, my fundamental axioms shifted (h/t @izebel_eth) to being simply: everything is flows
all philosophies are downstream of that:
new coin good old coin bad, because it's all flavor of the week, the latest flavor gets all the flows. Recency bias wins. First order thinking wins.
- +ve flows: net buying pressure, lockups, sinks. -ve flows: selling pressure, & emissions (which sells)
- As such, today, people want the coins to go up, but constant selling means the coins go down. Emissions, whatever. And most sinks don't work. No one wants to lock their shit up. Thus, tokens have a natural tendency to go down, not up
- Fundamentals is just another way to attract flows. The idea is hopefully you trade at low P/E = you are attractive = people buy. Or better yet, you buy back your own token (more flows)
- DATs are the latest way to stop this. Again, these guys basically shore up $$$ and buy a ton of the token - net buying pressure. DATs are the best example of this ideology being right: bc for a short amount of time, these tokens go up (net buying), before going back down again (natural tendency to go down)
- Buybacks also work for a while, but the truth is, only Hyperliquid has enough to actually buyback ALOT of their own token. Otherwise, buybacks themselves is non-negligible
- But across the past 6 months, there have been some outperformers. And using my natural pattern recognition skills, I realised - and this is my deeply unpopular opinion:
Chinese coins win, Western coins lose. Or as this tweet says:
- This isn't a race thing, it just boils down to how the incentives are aligned, and how the tokens are structured.
Both BNB and MNT are heavily controlled by Binance and Bybit, but they don't have an incentive to sell. Why would they? This basically represents the exchange. If it goes to 0, this would reflect so badly on the exchange.
- Whereas EVERY OTHER SINGLE TOKEN IN THE WORLD, has VCs, who have a FIDUCIARY MANDATE to sell. This is obvious, but no one has gotten it in their heads. <MEGAFUND> owns your coin? Good for flows (attention game) when you launch, bad when they unlock.
- It's very simply an incentive design question. And if you ask me "yea but we need VCs" - I don't disagree. All I'm saying is, as a trader, I want things to go up. And things with selling pressure tend to not go up.
- Memes and onchain were popular because they actually went up. And then it got bad because people got scammed, and onchain coins started being rugged, and the breadth was too much, and capital started flowing everywhere, and then now we have no capital again, yada yada
- Anyways, this is also not a tweet that says low float high fdv is good. I believe low float high fdv is again, a flows thing - it does well for a week, and then dumps (because the fdv is high, so there's alot of unlocks)
- Instead, it's really more of <who owns your coin?> It's why I'm 50% ASTER, 50% MNT. Look at this glorious tokenomics sheets. 0% to VCs and investors. And obviously the airdrop is gonna just be gamed such that Binance-aligned entities own most of the airdrop.
But what's wrong w that? I'd want my token to be in the hands of people who actually believe in the thing.
As such, I do not own 99% of other coins over the longer term time horizon. Again, short term flows could dominate leading to good PA (see XPL on launch), but over the long term, they will flow out (see XPL today)
Look at Hyperliquid. What's their selling point? NO VCs. NO ONE MISALIGNED. I'm like 90% sure the team is not gonna dump their tokens too. So Hyperliquid is probably the only other coin that makes sense. Ultimately, I want something I can comfortably hold, and today, that is basically exchange related coins + Hyperliquid. That is all.
I think degentrading's tweet very aptly summarizes it tbh. Everyone smart has basically come to the same conclusion at some point, I probably am not early, am not that smart, but I am loud, so I am shouting about it (doing my job as a key opinion leader, giving my key opinions)
okii gbye.