Alex Woodard

theblock.co/post/396027/un… Wild headline: "7 months of runway on $86mm treasury"

@crypto_condom @Tom__Capital Mara continues to be the worst run company in crypto. Went asset lite right before it became clear that miners needed to own every level of the stack just to be barely profitable. Tried to pivot to being a DAT and raise converts. 18 months late to pivot to AI/HPC data centers.

Miners selling BTC to pivot to AI was something CCap published research on late last year. We are below the break even point for miner profitability and I would not be surprised to see more miner selling along the way.

This is a very good layout of the $STRC and $MSTR situation, but fails to address the most critical part. Leverage ratio is a cute metric to determine credit-worthiness, but interest expense (and really interest coverage ratio) is what ultimately determines long-term solvency. Having a low debt/equity ratio only matters if you expect them to sell the BTC to service the debt, but since the entire MSTR thesis relies on them not doing this, leverage ratio is pretty much irrelevant. Interest coverage = EBIT / Interest. MSTR earns $0 in EBIT, and thus has no interest coverage. That's scary enough as it is, but when you realize they have $1 bn+ of interest and dividend payments annually (and growing), it shows that eventually this company will run out of ways to service these debt and pref payments. Which means that the long-term outcome for MSTR has to be one of these options: 1) $BTC goes up forever, and MSTR just continues to issue more and more equity, even if mNAV falls below $1. This is fine for keeping MSTR afloat, but obviously not good for the $MSTR stock. 2) MSTR stops paying the dividends (meaning that buying $STRC is just a game of when, not if, they stop paying). This is the most logical end path, but it kills the fly wheel. Would expect this only if Saylor decides he owns enough BTC and no longer cares about buying more. 3) MSTR sells some $BTC each year to cover the annual payments -- this is the next most logical path, but it again kills the fly wheel. As soon as he sells even $1 of BTC, the story is dead. 4) MSTR uses the BTC on balance sheet to buy a cash-flow generative business that can add EBIT and thus service the debt. This is my favorite outcome - MSTR really should become a BTC-denominated Berkshire Hathaway... but this has never been discussed by Saylor 5) They simply default (this only happens if BTC crashes to a level where MSTR's BTC assets fall below the value of the debt, and they can't refinance the debt, which would currently only happen around $20,000/BTC). 6) BTC actually becomes a productive asset one day instead of just a pet rock, and MSTR can earn enough yield on the BTC holdings (via selling calls, or lending) to service the annual interest expense. TL/DR -- this is still a ponzi scheme. It's a very very very good and clever ponzi, and will probably last a very long time, but it's still a ponzi. As I've always said, there are no covenants in the debt that force MSTR to sell the BTC (forced selling is not a risk)... but voluntary selling to cover interest & dividend payments is a real risk. And if you don't believe he will ever do that, then you have to recognize that he will eventually stop the dividend. Right now... there are 4 stakeholders that all think they are fine, but all 4 cannot survive -- it is survival of the fittest 1) Bitcoin holders feel comfortable that he will never sell the BTC (but if that's true, 2-4 below are wrong) 2) MSTR debtholders feel comfortable that the debt will always be covered by the assets, which is most likely true, but not if he is forced to sell the assets to pay dividends (meaning 2 and 3 can't both be right). 3) Pfd shareholders (including but not limited to $STRC) feel comfortable because MSTR currently has $2 bn+ of cash, and can always sell more BTC, or more MSTR shares, or more STRC to pay for future dividends (meaning 3 can be right, but only if 1, 2 or 4 are wrong). 4) MSTR shareholders feel comfortable b/c they think BTC will go up forever and mNAV will stay above 1.0 (but that can't happen if 3 is right). Individually, all 4 stakeholders can be right... and for a long time. But collectively, they cannot all be right long-term. And that is the major risk.

Gov token prices seem to finally reflect that they’re the bottom of the food chain. Founders and foundations are the natural predators of tokenholders. Tokenholders will always just be a source of free financing until they stand up for themselves

Imagine dumping half a billion of stock and then posting yourself over subway surfers. The absolute dream

Gold and Silver have done over $20B in volume on Hyperliquid over the last 10 days It's also reached ~1% of COMEX's combined daily volume in the last 2 days For context, this ratio was <0.1% just two weeks ago. Slowly then all at once. Hyperliquid.

@smartestxyz @chameleon_jeff @HyperliquidX Love it

I have been a Hyperliquid User since December 2023 and I’ve always wanted to give something back to the team and especially @chameleon_jeff. He built something so incredible and exciting that I’ll be telling my grandkids about it! Here is my 59-page research paper about Hyperliquid and why it will become 'The Blockchain to House all Finance'. Since the file is too large to upload directly, I’m sharing the Google Drive link. The attached images show the Table of Contents. big thank you to @HyperliquidX and @chameleon_jeff also thanks to @mlmabc for his insane fast research! (drive.google.com/file/d/18keiHv…)

@ImperiumPaper Hilarious

Sky facilitators blackballed a delegate who is crashing out on the forum. His plea demonstrates this delegate must have thought delegates were allowed opinions. Best? The reply: “This response demonstrates that you still do not understand the role of an Aligned Delegate”

@0xGeeGee lmaooo 😭

Holy shit this is hilarious from Aragon

Concluding from the HYPE price action that no one took the time to do the math --- 1. 2.6M was unstaked 2. ~850k was restaked immediately (because these were staking rewards not unlocks) 3. ~600k got sent to the DAT (removing token side sell pressure) 4. Four employees restaked ~235k tokens So the actual potential sell pressure was 900k tokens --- They bought back 1.9M tokens in a down November month...

The problem isn't crypto projects generating revenue, it's that 99% of them shouldn't have a token. If a crypto project has a token, it should try and generate as much revenue as possible to create the most value for token holders. Fees serve as incentives to compete, and competition in turn leads to innovation. However, if you believe that projects with a token should generate as little revenue as possible, then that token is worthless AND the project has no incentive beyond benevolence to innovate. So the problem is not that DeFi protocols make money, it's that they have memecoins that larp as entitlements to future cash flow. futardio.

1. Depends what your definition of failing is 2. Depends on if you are talking about the tech or the token... the tech is bad ass but that's not what people are buying --- Unfort no one even knows what the asset they are buying on the pre-market at $5.3B is because the tokenomics haven't even been released yet (somehow) 😂 So while we wait, we can postulate on what it probably looks like (OP screenshots attached for future state snapshot)... --- Demand Drivers - Validating: Recurring demand extremely low - Gas fees: Fast, cheap, and therefore very little demand created - Staking (for more MON tokens): tokens in tokens out... Pool 2 - Governance: lol - Temporary speculation: Huge positive demand driver until it's not and becomes a huge negative demand drive, so basically net-net 0 Inflation/Dilution - Validator payment: Valid & necessary (but sell pressure in perpetuity) - Airdrops: 9-10 figs of immediate sell pressure - Grants: 7-9 figs of immediate sell pressure - Ecosystem Fund: 8-10 figs of immediate sell pressure - Team: 8-10 figs of sell pressure constantly slamming the token & scares off buyers - Investors: 8-10 of sell pressure constantly slamming the token & scares off buyers - Public Goods Funding: 7-9 figs of immediate sell pressure - Staking Rewards: 7-9figs figs of constant sell pressure --- There are five L1/L2 tokens to ever exist that have broken into the upper echelon out of ~1500. That’s 0.33% success rate. The assets themselves are just broken in design. In any other world, a 0.33% success rate means there is something broken. Nothing against Monad. --- My guess is it will go well for some time, but very long-term time horizon: - The tech will kick ass - The inflation/dilution avalanche overpowers demand - Team and VC Investors make off with ~$3B by selling into retail daily for years on end - Founder steps down after finding himself on an ayahuasca retreat (coincidentally the same day as team unlocks end) - New venture funds get raised to run it back turbo Your question shouldn't be why will Monad fail... It should be why almost all tokens fail? The "thought leaders" (Tier 1 VCs) have pushed the idea that crypto is impervious to supply & demand--the most basic concept of markets

🚨Proxy Advisor ISS Recommends $CORZ Investors Vote Against Deal 🚨ISS recommends $CORZ Investors Reject Bid $CORZ +3%

@0xGeeGee Gm 🙃

Holy shit what did I wake up to

@ImperiumPaper May I interest you in "Adj. EBITDA" where we exclude depreciation and SBC

These two statements are mutually exclusive. Net revenue doesn’t include a major expense. But revenue is transparently measured. 🤷‍♂️

@0xGeeGee @dcfgod Haven't looked at a good RFV in a year bc the market is on easy mode of buying good products with growing revenues. Almost makes you miss the bear market 😭

If this wasn't a full bull market, @dcfgod would be driving a cortege of lambos through the Rage Trade unwinding 7x in 3 months? one of the most profitable unwinding i've seen so far

Kudos to the @rage_trade for this wind down. The majority of projects aren't gonna make it so this sets a good precedent vs burning through the entire treasury before quitting. Good for the team looking to exit, good for investors 🤝

72 hours. Every comment read and concern addressed. We’re out of the war room, with @PayPal + @Venmo on board. USDH Proposal v2: ❏ PayPal ecosystem integrations + $20M incentives ❏ AF pledge starts at 20% and rises w/ TVL ❏ Paxos takes 0 until >$1B, capped at 5% past $5B

⚡️ JUST IN: Hyperliquid recorded $330.8B in trading volume in July, surpassing U.S. brokerage giant Robinhood.

The SEC's new "Project Crypto" is the most bullish thing I've seen in a long time from a regulator. Read the speech, it's incredible: * Almost all tokens are not securities * Want to discourage decentralization kabuki theater * Americans should not get excluded by IP/VPN blocks * Explicit exemptions for ICOs, airdrops, etc. * Non-securities should be tradeable alongside securities on the same platforms * Protect software engineers * Streamline licensing requirements * "Innovation exemption" to protect builders pre-decentralization Wow. Wow wow wow.