Sabitlenmiş Tweet
yieldfarming
9.9K posts

yieldfarming retweetledi

yea so the thesis is short tesla currently planning to have ~20% nw short tsla exposure
Cassandra Unchained@michaeljburry
Must read - this is free and not me. @georgenoble/note/c-226667679?r=4repfn&utm_medium=ios&utm_source=notes-share-action" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">substack.com/@georgenoble/n…
This is the most SHAMELESS structural manipulation of a major index I've ever seen. SpaceX is preparing what could be the largest IPO in history. Target valuation: $1.75 trillion. That would make it the sixth-largest company in America on day one. And Nasdaq wants the listing so badly they're literally CHANGING how the Nasdaq-100 works. In February, Nasdaq published a "consultation" proposing sweeping changes to how companies enter the index. The timing is pure coincidence, of course. Just like it's pure coincidence that SpaceX has reportedly made fast index inclusion a CONDITION of listing on Nasdaq. Here's what they're proposing: A new "Fast Entry" rule would let any newly listed company whose market cap ranks in the top 40 of current Nasdaq-100 members get added to the index after just 15 trading days. No seasoning period. No liquidity requirements. Completely exempt from the standards every other company had to meet. Currently, new public companies typically wait up to a year before they're eligible for major index inclusion. That waiting period exists for a reason. It lets the market establish real price discovery. It protects passive investors from being forced into untested, illiquid stocks. And Nasdaq wants to throw all of that out. For ONE listing. But the Fast Entry rule isn't even the worst part... The real scandal is the 5x float multiplier. Right now, the S&P 500 uses a free-float adjusted methodology. If only 5% of a company's shares are available for public trading, the index weights you at 5% of total market cap. That's common sense. You weight a company based on what investors can actually buy. Nasdaq's current methodology already uses total market cap rather than free-float for weighting. But for very low-float stocks, they at least had a 10% minimum float threshold. Under the new proposal, that threshold DISAPPEARS entirely. Instead, any stock with less than 20% free float gets weighted at FIVE TIMES its actual float percentage, capped at 100%. Do the math on SpaceX: If SpaceX IPOs at $1.75 trillion and floats 5% of its shares, there would be roughly $87.5 billion worth of stock available for public trading. Under Nasdaq's proposed 5x multiplier, the index would weight SpaceX at 25% of its total market cap. That means passive funds would be forced to buy as if SpaceX were a $437.5 billion company. But only $87.5 billion of stock actually exists in the market. You are forcing hundreds of billions in passive buying into a $87.5 billion float. QQQ alone manages nearly $400 billion. The total Nasdaq-100 ecosystem represents over $1.4 trillion in exposure across ETFs, mutual funds, structured notes, and derivatives. Every single passive vehicle tracking this index would be REQUIRED to buy SpaceX at whatever price the market dictates. On Day 15. With zero price discovery. Zero track record as a public company. And a float so thin you could read through it. So what this actually does is it creates a structural wealth transfer mechanism. The passive bid from index funds pushes the stock price higher. That higher price benefits exactly one group of people: the insiders and early investors who own the other 95% of the shares. And when lock-up periods expire 90 to 180 days later? Those insiders sell into the artificially inflated passive bid. Your 401(k) is the exit liquidity. This is the fundamental corruption of indexing. Indexing used to be brilliant. Low cost. Efficient. You were free-riding on the price discovery done by active managers. The index reflected the market. Now the index IS the market. Trillions of dollars flow blindly into whatever the index tells them to buy. And the people who control the index methodology are changing the rules to serve the interests of a single IPO candidate. The S&P 500 requires companies to have at least… English
yieldfarming retweetledi

stop lying sam. you know the balance sheet you showed me of our assets after you stopped withdrawals was not near enough to meet the obligations. and we had ran entirely out of certain crypto assets, which would mean every single user had to have lent out 100% of their balance in that asset, but we know that wasn’t the case so that’s false (otherwise we would still be custodying their non lent out balance). also the reported spot margin market was only 2.5bn at the time of the blowup. so how was the hole 8bn from a 2.5bn margin market?
English

@delucinator You can only withdrawal in $10M chunks. Getting out 10 figs without triggering a red flag would be impossible.
English

@CL207 the first mover is hlp who is now directionally postioned tho the manipulator is probably gonna make a shitload of money as billions get dumped as his short leg goes on
but yea in practice this is much more realistic in a smaller tokens
English

@delucinator in market manipulation, and assuming that the rest of the market is mostly neutrally positioned
then theres something like ... a first mover disadvantage, cus if another player comes in, your totally cooked
dis why its better to own supply for the token you wana manipulate
English

This is a PSA for traders trading Korean equities on Lighter to beware - if the protocol worked (it never did) the bucket would get ADL'd now
as of 8:22 KST
Hyundai: 530000 (-24141)
Samsung: 179100 (-7248)
Hynix: 863000 (-1182)
Hanmi: 242500 (-496)
KRcomp (Kospi): 5791 (whatever)
net: 33067 loss + 2087 funding = 30980 loss - LLP is already bankrupt if the oracles weren't broken
so if Lighter starts magically working again, traders will get ADLed and if KR equities go lower they will get ADLed at an unfavorable price

yieldfarming@delucinator
i told myself i wont whine about lighter anymore but man it actually lasted the whole trading day with a stale oracle 6% off spot today
English

@_ConorMoore hey, thanks for this context.
one question - is the collateral backing it us dollars?
English

i will work with barker to provide some kind of public attestation that they are insuring the servers in line with the coverage we've provided. originally intended to just post the contracts directly but they wont let us bc of moral hazard risk.
alternatively, if you want to sign an NDA, i can send you a copy of the actual insurance policy. can dm me if youre interested.
what other things do you not believe?
English

Hyperliquid
Chinese zk farm
Chinese zk farm
Hyperliquid pro
Lighter
Hyperliquid News@HyperliquidNews
The HIP-3 @tradexyz dex has overtaken @Lighter_xyz in open interest.
Deutsch

