15
07
2025

PAGES

15
07
2025

spot_img

PAGES

Home Blog

Bybit Delists TAP, VPR, COT, SON, TENET, HVH, BRAWL

0

Bybit announced the delisting of several tokens, including Tap (TAP), VaporFund (VPR), Cosplay Token (COT), Souni (SON), Tenet Protocol (TENET), Havah (HVH), Brawl AI Layer (BRAWL), along with others like KCAL, MOJO, SALD, and THN. This decision aligns with Bybit’s periodic review to maintain a robust trading ecosystem, citing factors such as project performance and compliance with listing criteria.

Trading for these tokens has been halted, and users were advised to withdraw their holdings by October 7, 2025, at 10:00 AM UTC, after which any remaining balances will be converted to USDT at the market price. Deposits for these tokens were disabled as of July 8, 2025, at 10:00 AM UTC. For further details, Bybit’s official announcement provides the full schedule and process.

Delisting from a high-volume exchange like Bybit significantly reduces liquidity for these tokens, making it harder for holders to buy or sell them efficiently. This can lead to increased price volatility and wider bid-ask spreads on remaining platforms, if any. Bybit’s global user base of over 60 million means these tokens lose exposure to a large pool of traders, potentially stifling growth and adoption.

For tokens like Tap (TAPS), which gained traction through viral Telegram-based games with over 60 million users, this could hinder momentum post-launch. Delistings often trigger sharp price declines due to reduced market confidence and selling pressure from investors seeking to exit positions before trading halts. For instance, VaporFund (VPR) was trading at $0.00060238 as of May 2025, but delisting could exacerbate downward trends, especially for low-cap tokens.

Delisting signals potential issues with a project’s performance, compliance, or viability, as Bybit’s reviews focus on these factors. This can erode trust in projects like Havah (HVH), which aimed to enhance NFT interoperability, or Tenet Protocol (TENET), which had partnerships with Conflux and Qtum. Bybit’s policy converts remaining token balances to USDT at market price by October 7, 2025, potentially locking in losses for investors who fail to withdraw in time.

Retail investors, in particular, may face challenges navigating this process due to limited awareness or technical expertise. Investors must seek alternative exchanges or decentralized platforms to trade these tokens, which may involve higher fees, lower liquidity, or increased risk. For tokens like Tap (TAPS), rumored to be listed on platforms like Binance, investors may need to monitor other exchanges for continued trading opportunities.

Delisting can disrupt project funding, as reduced liquidity and market exposure often lead to lower token valuations, impacting the ability to raise capital. Projects like Souni (SON) or Cosplay Token (COT), which may rely on niche communities, could face significant setbacks. Teams must address community concerns to maintain support. For example, TapSwap’s anonymity and technical glitches have already drawn criticism, and delisting could amplify skepticism about its legitimacy.

Delistings align with stricter regulatory standards, as seen with tightened crypto listing guidance in some jurisdictions. This could push projects to improve compliance or risk further delistings elsewhere. Bybit’s focus on a “healthy digital asset environment” suggests a trend toward prioritizing high-quality projects, potentially marginalizing smaller or less-established tokens. This could concentrate market activity around major cryptocurrencies like BTC (61.13% dominance) and ETH (8.63%).

Retail Investors often lack the resources or knowledge to quickly adapt to delistings, facing losses or logistical challenges in moving assets to other platforms. The short withdrawal window (by October 7, 2025) may disproportionately affect retail holders who are less active or informed. Institutional Investors typically have better access to alternative markets, diversified portfolios, and professional advice, mitigating the impact of delistings. They may also benefit from shorting opportunities as prices drop post-announcement.

Larger projects with listings on multiple exchanges (e.g., Bitcoin, Ethereum) are less affected by a single exchange’s delisting. They benefit from Bybit’s focus on robust infrastructure and major protocols. Smaller tokens like Brawl AI Layer (BRAWL) or Souni (SON) face existential risks, as delisting from a major exchange like Bybit can cripple their visibility and viability, widening the gap between established and nascent projects.

Users in regions with strong regulatory frameworks (e.g., New York, where crypto listing guidance is tightening) may see delistings as a sign of market maturation, favoring compliance and stability. In regions with less regulatory oversight, where projects like TapSwap have gained traction through viral adoption, delistings could discourage participation and limit access to Web3 opportunities, deepening global disparities in crypto adoption.

Bybit’s delisting reflects the control CEXs wield over token ecosystems, potentially pushing users toward decentralized exchanges (DEXs) like Uniswap or Osmosis, which offer greater resilience to delistings. Projects may pivot to DEXs or alternative blockchains, but this requires technical sophistication and community support, which not all projects (e.g., Cosplay Token or VaporFund) may possess, creating a divide between those that can adapt and those that cannot.

Bybit’s delisting of TAP, VPR, COT, SON, TENET, HVH, BRAWL, and others reflects a broader trend of exchanges prioritizing quality and compliance, with significant implications for liquidity, pricing, and project sustainability. The divide highlights disparities between retail and institutional investors, established and emerging projects, developed and developing markets, and centralized and decentralized ecosystems.

The 26 Base Points Drop in CESR To 2.89% Signals Reduced Staking Profitability

0

The Composite Ether Staking Rate (CESR), which tracks the mean annualized staking yield for Ethereum validators, is reported at 2.89%, down 26 basis points (bps). This reflects a recent decline in staking yields, likely influenced by factors such as increased validator participation or reduced network transaction fees, as CESR accounts for consensus rewards, priority transaction fees, deposits, withdrawals, and slashing events.

CESR has historically fluctuated, with peaks as high as 8% during events like the FTX collapse in 2022, driven by network dynamics. The current rate of 2.89% is notably lower than earlier benchmarks like Pier Two’s 7-day APR of 3.79% or 30-day APR of 3.58% reported in August 2024, indicating a downward trend. The reported 26 basis point (bps) drop in the Ether Composite Staking Rate (CESR) to 2.89% has several implications for Ethereum stakers, the broader Ethereum ecosystem, and market dynamics.

A lower CESR means validators earn less annualized return on their staked ETH (32 ETH per validator). At 2.89%, a validator staking 32 ETH would earn approximately 0.9256 ETH per year (32 * 0.0289), compared to 1.1552 ETH at the prior rate of 3.15% (2.89% + 0.26%). This reduces the financial incentive for staking, particularly for smaller or individual validators with higher operational costs.

Staking yields are influenced by the number of active validators (currently around 1.2 million, staking over 39 million ETH, or ~33% of total ETH supply, per recent data) and network transaction fees. The drop likely reflects increased validator participation diluting rewards or lower network activity reducing priority transaction fees (tips). The lower yield may discourage new validators from joining, especially those with high setup or maintenance costs (e.g., hardware, electricity, or liquid staking fees).

However, Ethereum’s staking is relatively locked-in due to the 32 ETH requirement and potential exit queues, so immediate validator exits are unlikely. Persistent low yields could slow validator growth, potentially stabilizing CESR if fewer new validators join. Conversely, if yields drop further, some validators might exit, though this is constrained by Ethereum’s exit queue mechanism (e.g., ~1,150 validators can exit daily under normal conditions).

Lower CESR may push stakers toward liquid staking protocols (e.g., Lido, Rocket Pool), which offer additional yield through DeFi integrations or tokenized staked ETH (e.g., stETH, rETH). Lido currently stakes ~33% of all ETH staked, and lower CESR could accelerate this concentration as stakers seek higher returns. Increased reliance on liquid staking protocols raises centralization concerns, as a few providers dominate the validator pool, potentially threatening Ethereum’s decentralization ethos.

A declining CESR could signal reduced network activity or oversaturation of validators, potentially dampening investor confidence in ETH’s utility or yield-generating potential. This could pressure ETH’s price, especially if paired with broader market downturns. ETH’s price has been volatile, with recent analyses suggesting a 3.5% APR benchmark for staking in Q2 2025. A drop to 2.89% might align with bearish market conditions or reduced transaction volumes post-Ethereum upgrades (e.g., Dencun in 2024, which lowered Layer 2 fees).

High validator counts (despite lower yields) ensure Ethereum’s Proof-of-Stake (PoS) network remains secure, as more validators make attacks (e.g., 51% attacks) costlier. The 39 million ETH staked represents a significant economic commitment to network security. If yields fall too low, smaller validators may become unprofitable, potentially reducing validator diversity and increasing reliance on institutional or centralized staking providers.

Institutional players, staking pools, or liquid staking providers (e.g., Lido, Coinbase) can absorb lower yields due to economies of scale, lower per-ETH operational costs, and additional revenue from DeFi or service fees. They may continue staking profitably at 2.89%. Individual validators running solo nodes face higher relative costs (e.g., hardware, electricity, technical expertise). A 26 bps drop could push their operations closer to or below profitability, discouraging participation and concentrating staking among wealthier or institutional players.

The CESR drop may widen the gap between well-funded stakers and retail validators, reducing the diversity of Ethereum’s validator set. Lower yields incentivize stakers to join large liquid staking protocols for better returns or convenience, increasing the dominance of providers like Lido (which controls ~33% of staked ETH). This centralization risks Ethereum’s core principle of decentralization, as a few entities could influence network governance or validator behavior.

Smaller, decentralized staking pools (e.g., Rocket Pool) or solo stakers may struggle to compete, exacerbating the divide between centralized staking giants and those prioritizing Ethereum’s decentralized ethos. The CESR drop could accelerate centralization unless countered by community-driven initiatives or protocol changes (e.g., reducing the 32 ETH minimum, though not currently proposed). Some stakers prioritize yield and may shift capital to alternative networks (e.g., Solana, Binance Smart Chain) offering higher staking returns if CESR continues to decline.

Others stake to support Ethereum’s security and decentralization, accepting lower yields as a trade-off for ideological alignment. The CESR drop tests this commitment, potentially alienating profit-focused stakers. This divide could fragment the staking community, with long-term implications for Ethereum’s governance and community cohesion. Staking requires significant capital (32 ETH, ~$80,000 at $2,500/ETH) and technical know-how, which excludes many potential validators, particularly in regions with lower wealth or limited tech infrastructure.

A lower CESR reduces the incentive for new entrants, perpetuating this divide. The drop may reinforce staking as an activity for wealthier or technically savvy participants, limiting global participation in Ethereum’s PoS. The CESR drop aligns with Ethereum’s post-Merge (2022) environment, where staking yields have trended downward due to high validator participation and reduced transaction fees post-Dencun upgrade.

For comparison, CESR was ~3.5% in Q2 2024, and earlier peaks (e.g., 8% in 2022) were driven by high network activity. The current 2.89% reflects a maturing PoS system but challenges staker profitability. Ethereum’s community or developers could explore adjustments to counter low yields, such as tweaking reward structures or exit queue dynamics, though no such proposals are currently prominent. Past upgrades (e.g., EIP-1559, Dencun) show Ethereum’s adaptability, but changes to staking mechanics are complex and contentious.

The 26 bps drop in CESR to 2.89% signals reduced staking profitability, potentially discouraging smaller validators and accelerating reliance on liquid staking protocols. This exacerbates economic and centralization divides within Ethereum’s staking ecosystem, pitting large-scale stakers against retail validators and profit motives against decentralization ideals. While Ethereum’s network security remains robust, the lower yield challenges the inclusivity and diversity of its validator pool.

Starknet To Unlock 3.79% Of Its Supply On 15th July 2025

0

Starknet (STRK) is set to unlock 3.79% of its circulating supply worth $18.29 million could not be verified with the available information. Starknet would unlock 3.79% of its circulating supply, valued at $19.04 million, on July 15, 2025.  As of July 14, 2025, the circulating supply of STRK is approximately 3.59 billion tokens, with a price of around $0.1418 per token, resulting in a market cap of about $509.91 million.

A 3.79% unlock of the circulating supply would equate to roughly 136 million tokens. At the current price, this would be worth approximately $19.29 million. Token unlocks are often scheduled to release locked tokens to contributors, investors, or the community, and Starknet’s tokenomics include a plan for gradual unlocks over time.

The unlock will increase the circulating supply of STRK by 127 million tokens, which could lead to selling pressure if early contributors, investors, or other token holders decide to liquidate their newly unlocked tokens. This may cause a downward price movement, especially if the market is not prepared for the additional supply. Historical data shows that token unlocks can lead to price volatility.

For instance, Starknet’s previous unlock schedule adjustments in April 2024 were made to mitigate community concerns about large token dumps, which initially caused a 10% price increase after the announcement of a more gradual unlock plan. However, the July 2025 unlock could still trigger caution among investors, potentially leading to a bearish sentiment if not accompanied by positive project developments.

If demand for STRK remains strong—due to network growth, staking incentives, or new use cases—the price impact might be minimal. For example, the introduction of staking in Q4 2024 and the potential for liquid staking tokens (LSTs) could encourage holders to stake rather than sell, reducing sell-off pressure. Starknet faced criticism in February 2024 for its original unlock schedule, which was perceived as favoring insiders by allowing a large token release (1.34 billion tokens) shortly after the token became tradable.

The revised, more gradual schedule (0.64% monthly until March 2025, then 1.27% monthly until March 2027) was well-received, boosting the token price by 10% at the time. The July 2025 unlock aligns with this revised schedule, which may reassure investors due to its predictability and smaller size compared to the original plan. StarkWare’s proactive communication about token unlocks and its responsiveness to community feedback (e.g., adjusting the schedule in 2024) could mitigate negative sentiment.

However, any unexpected changes or lack of strategic announcements around the unlock could erode trust, especially if the market perceives the unlock as benefiting insiders over retail investors. The introduction of permissionless staking in November 2024 allows STRK holders (except the Starknet Foundation, StarkWare, and locked token holders) to stake tokens for network security and rewards. This could encourage holders to lock up their tokens rather than sell them post-unlock, potentially stabilizing the token’s value.

Additionally, the availability of liquid staking tokens (LSTs) enables participation in DeFi while staking, which could increase STRK’s utility and demand. Starknet’s roadmap includes significant upgrades like the Stwo prover (expected in Q1-Q2 2025), which aims to reduce transaction costs and improve scalability. If these developments coincide with the unlock, positive sentiment around the project’s progress could offset potential selling pressure.

For example, StarkWare’s efforts to scale Bitcoin with STARK technology and the launch of Starknet v0.13.3 (featuring lower gas fees) have been highlighted as major milestones, potentially boosting investor confidence. Starknet’s integration with major oracles like Chainlink and Pyth, as well as native wallet improvements (e.g., Argent and Braavos), enhances its appeal for developers and users. These advancements could drive adoption, increasing demand for STRK and counteracting the unlock’s supply increase.

The July 15, 2025, unlock is part of a broader wave of token unlocks across multiple projects (e.g., WalletConnect, Cyber, Arbitrum), which could contribute to overall market volatility. If the crypto market is in a bearish phase, the combined effect of these unlocks might amplify downward pressure on STRK’s price. Conversely, a bullish market could absorb the additional supply with minimal impact.

Some analyses suggest a bearish outlook for STRK in July 2025, with projections indicating a potential price drop to $0.08–$0.10 due to the unlock and broader market trends. However, longer-term forecasts remain bullish, with predictions of STRK reaching $1.10–$2.78 by the end of 2025, driven by ecosystem growth and staking adoption.

External events, such as the release of China’s Q2 2025 GDP data or the U.S. Consumer Inflation CPI for June (both scheduled for July 15, 2025), could influence overall crypto market sentiment, indirectly affecting STRK’s price reaction to the unlock. Investors should monitor market sentiment and trading volume around July 15, 2025, as large unlocks can lead to rapid price movements if holders sell en masse.

Historical data shows STRK’s price dropped significantly (89% from its all-time high of $3.66 in February 2024 to $0.3973 by October 2024), partly due to unlock-related concerns and market downturns. The ability to stake STRK or use LSTs in DeFi protocols could provide opportunities for investors to earn yields rather than sell, potentially mitigating the unlock’s impact. Investors should assess the staking rewards and DeFi yields available at the time.

Despite short-term risks, Starknet’s focus on scalability, low-cost transactions, and cross-chain scaling (e.g., Bitcoin and Ethereum) positions it as a strong Layer 2 solution. Investors with a long-term horizon may view temporary price dips as buying opportunities, especially if Starknet delivers on its roadmap. The Starknet token unlock on July 15, 2025, could introduce short-term price volatility due to increased supply, with a potential downward pressure if holders sell their tokens.

However, factors such as staking incentives, ongoing ecosystem developments (e.g., Stwo prover, lower fees), and StarkWare’s history of addressing community concerns could mitigate negative impacts. Investors should closely monitor market sentiment, project announcements, and broader market conditions around the unlock date.

Singapore High Court Hearing Is A Make-Or-Break Moment For WazirX

0

The restructuring plan, filed by WazirX’s parent company, Zettai Pte Ltd, under Singapore’s Companies Act 1967, aims to repay creditors affected by the hack, attributed to North Korea’s Lazarus Group. The plan proposed distributing 75–80% of user funds through cryptocurrency payments and recovery tokens (RTs), which could be traded or held for potential gains from future platform profits. Initial payouts were promised within 10 business days of court approval.

However, the court’s June 2025 rejection led WazirX to explore relocating to Panama and rebranding as Zensui Corporation, though no such move has been confirmed. The July 15 hearing is pivotal, as approval could enable WazirX to resume operations and begin repayments, while rejection might lead to liquidation, delaying recoveries potentially until 2030. The outcome could also influence crypto regulation in Singapore and user trust in centralized exchanges.

WazirX has faced criticism for unclear communication, with users expressing frustration on platforms like X over delays and lack of transparency. The exchange is under a moratorium until at least August 2025, protecting it from new legal actions while it refines its plan. The Singapore High Court hearing on WazirX’s Scheme of Arrangement, scheduled for July 15, 2025, with a reserve date of July 16, 2025, carries significant implications for the cryptocurrency exchange, its users, creditors, and the broader crypto ecosystem, particularly in light of the $234 million hack on July 18, 2024.

If the court approves the revised restructuring plan, WazirX could begin distributing 75–80% of user funds within 10 business days, primarily through cryptocurrency payments and Recovery Tokens (RTs) tied to future platform profits. This could provide immediate relief to approximately 500,000 affected users, restoring a significant portion of their assets, though not in full.

Approval would allow WazirX to resume operations, potentially relaunching as a decentralized exchange (DEX) under a new structure, possibly rebranded as Zensui Corporation in Panama. This could help rebuild user trust and enable the platform to generate profits to fund further recoveries. A successful restructuring would set a legal precedent in Singapore, a jurisdiction with a progressive crypto framework, for handling exchange insolvencies without liquidation.

This could encourage other hacked exchanges to pursue similar non-bankruptcy resolutions, influencing global crypto regulation Transparent fund distribution, backed by third-party audits and a clear repayment timeline, could restore confidence in WazirX and centralized exchanges more broadly, particularly in India, where WazirX was a leading platform.

If the court rejects the plan, WazirX may face liquidation, potentially delaying user repayments until 2030 due to legal and logistical complexities. This could lead to significant losses for users, as recovered assets might be sold off at depressed prices in a volatile crypto market, exacerbating financial damage. Rejection could intensify user dissatisfaction, already evident on platforms like X, where users have criticized WazirX for vague communication and delays.

This could further erode trust in centralized exchanges and drive users to decentralized alternatives. A failed restructuring might prompt stricter regulations in Singapore and India, particularly regarding proof-of-reserves and security protocols for crypto exchanges. This could reshape the regulatory landscape for centralized exchanges across Asia. With WazirX serving millions of Indian users, a collapse could undermine confidence in India’s crypto sector, potentially slowing adoption and innovation in a rapidly maturing market.

The hearing’s outcome may compel WazirX to disclose forensic reports on the hack, attributed to North Korea’s Lazarus Group, addressing creditor concerns about inadequate security protocols. This could push the industry toward stricter cybersecurity standards and mandatory audits. The case highlights jurisdictional complexities, as WazirX’s parent, Zettai Pte Ltd, operates in Singapore, while most users are in India. The decision could clarify how cross-border crypto disputes are handled, particularly when Indian courts, like the Supreme Court and NCDRC, have dismissed related cases, citing jurisdictional limits.

A successful outcome could bolster investor confidence in crypto exchanges during a bullish market, with Bitcoin trading above $120,000 in July 2025. Conversely, failure might trigger sell-offs and heighten skepticism about centralized platforms, especially amid ongoing volatility. Users have expressed frustration on X over WazirX’s lack of clear communication and shifting timelines, with some accusing the exchange of stalling. The court’s demand for a supplemental affidavit by July 4, 2025, underscores the need for greater transparency, which could influence the hearing’s outcome.

Affidavits, like one filed by user Romy Johnson on July 6, 2025, proposing to release only unhacked tokens, risk delaying recovery and creating division among creditors. Such actions could complicate the court’s decision and prolong uncertainty. The moratorium, extended until at least August 2025, shields WazirX from new legal actions but limits users’ ability to pursue remedies in India, raising questions about the applicability of Singapore’s legal framework to Indian users and Zanmai Labs’ INR services.

WazirX’s potential rebranding and relocation to Panama as Zensui Corporation could streamline operations under a more crypto-friendly jurisdiction but risks alienating users if perceived as evading accountability. The issuance of RTs, tradable and linked to future profits, introduces a novel recovery mechanism but depends on WazirX’s ability to relaunch successfully and generate revenue, which remains uncertain without court approval.

Approval could enable swift partial repayments, platform relaunch, and a strengthened position in the crypto market, while setting a positive precedent for handling exchange hacks. Rejection risks liquidation, prolonged delays, and a loss of user trust, with ripple effects on India’s crypto ecosystem and global regulatory frameworks. The outcome will hinge on WazirX’s ability to address the court’s transparency concerns and unify its creditor base, amidst growing user frustration and regulatory scrutiny.

The Dangote Deep Seaport: Economics and One Oasis [podcast]

0

The video podcast discusses the Dangote Group’s significant industrial projects in Lagos, Nigeria, primarily the integrated refinery complex. This complex is presented as one of Africa’s largest production systems, featuring the Dangote Oil Refinery, Petrochemical Plants, and Fertilizer Plants, all vertically integrated to minimize waste and maximize efficiency. The complex produces a wide array of essential products, including gasoline, diesel, jet fuel, urea-based fertilizers, and various petrochemicals like polypropylene, propane, sulfur, and base oil, aiming to satisfy domestic demand and generate export surpluses.

A key focus of the discussion is the critical need for a new Deep Seaport, despite the existing extensive infrastructure within the Dangote complex. This necessity arises from the severe congestion plaguing Nigerian ports, which significantly hinders efficient import and export operations. By constructing a dedicated, vertically integrated seaport, Dangote aims to gain complete control over its logistics chain, thereby enhancing efficiency, streamlining trade, and establishing a formidable competitive advantage through optimized pricing systems.

This strategic approach is encapsulated in what is termed the “one oasis strategy,” emphasizing Dangote’s comprehensive ownership and control across the entire supply chain. A cornerstone of this strategy is the Group’s robust trucking infrastructure, particularly the Dangote Sinotruk West Africa Limited, which produces trucks almost exclusively for the conglomerate. The seamless integration of this internal trucking capacity with the new Deep Seaport creates a powerful, end-to-end logistics system, solidifying Dangote’s market position and contributing significantly to Nigeria’s economic self-sufficiency, job creation, and industrial growth.

 

Download the podcast summary here.

Watch the podcast at Blucera.com.

How To Listen to Tekedia Daily

At Blucera, home of Blucera WinGPT (AI personal educator and coach), eVault Legal Custodial services (store vital personal, family and business documents securely), business tools to grow enterprises, and global archives of Tekedia courses and libraries, Ndubuisi Ekekwe podcasts every week day. Some Tekedia Institute programs offer bonus access to Tekedia Daily or one can register at Blucera for the podcast.