DD
MM
YYYY

CATEGORIES

PAGES

DD
MM
YYYY

spot_img

CATEGORIES

PAGES

Home Blog Page 130

Circle (CRCL) Stock Returns to IPO Price Amid JESSE Launch on Base

By
Paul Ugbede Godwin
-
0

Circle Internet Group (NYSE: CRCL), the issuer of the USDC stablecoin, has indeed circled back to its initial public offering (IPO) price amid a broader crypto market pullback.

The company went public on June 5, 2025, pricing shares at $69—above the initial expected range of $50–$52—raising $1.1 billion and debuting with a fully diluted valuation of $6.8–$8 billion.

Shares surged to an all-time high of $298.99 shortly after, fueled by crypto hype, but have since erased nearly all gains, closing at around $69.72 on November 19, 2025, and trading near $66–$68 as of November 21.

Key drivers of the decline include; Interest rate sensitivity: Circle’s revenue is heavily tied to yields on USDC reserves primarily short-term U.S. Treasuries. Management’s warnings about potential Federal Reserve rate cuts have spooked investors.

Insider selling and lockup expirations: Post-IPO hype led to a surge, but unlocking shares allowed insiders to sell, triggering a “sell-the-news” event after strong Q3 earnings 66% revenue growth, accelerating USDC circulation.

Broader crypto volatility, with Bitcoin capitulation at record levels, has amplified the drop. CRCL is down ~77% from its peak and ~40% in the last month. Despite the slump, analysts remain bullish: 17 firms rate it a “Buy” with a $144.92 12-month target (117% upside).

Institutional interest persists, with ARK Invest adding 215,000 shares recently. On X, traders are calling it a “full circle jerk” or “brutal reminder of IPO volatility,” but some see value for long-term stablecoin adoption.

CRCL’s fundamentals—USDC’s second-largest stablecoin status and revenue diversification—suggest this could be a buying opportunity if crypto rebounds, though volatility remains high.

Jesse Pollak Launches JESSE Token on Zora, Peaks at $26M Market Cap

Jesse Pollak, founder of Coinbase’s Base Layer-2 network, launched the $JESSE “creator coin” on Zora—a protocol for tokenizing social content—on November 20, 2025, at 9:00 AM PST.

Marketed as a playful experiment tying his personal brand to Base’s ecosystem, it quickly went viral but faced immediate bot sniping and volatility. Contrary to some early reports citing $7M peaks, on-chain data and trader chatter confirm it hit a high of ~$26M market cap within hours, driven by thousands of buy transactions before cooling.

Minted via Pollak’s Base app account on Zora, which auto-generates tradable tokens from posts. $JESSE builds on his prior “content coin” experiments, like the controversial “Base is for everyone” (BASE) mint in April 2025.

Pollak warned of impersonators pre-launch. It surged on speculation but saw rapid dumps, with X users noting “uphill battles” for late buyers. Ties to Zora’s $5.8B token up 18.9% amid the buzz amplified interest.

This fits Pollak’s pattern of Zora shilling—90% of his recent Base tokens have dropped 60%+—drawing fire for potential hype over substance. Coinbase Ventures’ backing of Zora ($60M raised) fuels debates on whether it’s innovation or “profit play.”

Post-peak, $JESSE trades lower (~$10–15M cap estimates from DEX tools like Dexscreener), with ongoing activity in ZORA/ETH pools. It’s community-driven with light utility for Base engagement, but expect meme-like swings.

On X, reactions range from excitement “fastest-moving on Base” to skepticism “another pump-and-dump?”. These events highlight crypto’s wild duality: institutional stability (CRCL) clashing with experimental memes ($JESSE). Both underscore Base/Zora’s growing role in tokenized culture, but DYOR—volatility is the only constant.

MicroStrategy Faces Potential Removal from Nasdaq 100 and MSCI USA Indexes

By
Paul Ugbede Godwin
-
0

MicroStrategy (MSTR), the business intelligence firm led by Bitcoin advocate Michael Saylor, is at risk of being excluded from major equity benchmarks like the Nasdaq 100 and MSCI USA indexes.

This development stems from a sharp decline in the company’s stock price, triggered by a broader cryptocurrency market crash, and increased scrutiny on firms with heavy exposure to digital assets.

Importantly, this does not involve delisting from the Nasdaq exchange itself—MicroStrategy remains fully listed and trading—but rather removal from these influential indexes, which could have cascading effects on investor demand.

MicroStrategy’s shares have plummeted over 57-60% in the past six months, erasing much of the premium investors once paid for its Bitcoin holdings. The stock’s volatility is closely tied to Bitcoin’s price, which has fallen from an all-time high of around $126,000 to below $81,000.

This drop has caused MicroStrategy to fall below the minimum market capitalization and liquidity thresholds required for Nasdaq 100 inclusion. The company holds 649,870 BTC valued at a 12.72% unrealized gain as of November 16, 2025, acquired through aggressive debt and equity raises.

Recent purchases include 8,178 BTC for $835.6 million. While Saylor views this as a long-term strength, index providers are reassessing firms where over 50% of assets derive from cryptocurrencies.

Both Nasdaq and MSCI are evaluating eligibility criteria amid market changes. A decision from MSCI is expected by January 15, 2026. Previously, there was optimism about MicroStrategy joining the S&P 500, but the crypto downturn has reversed that momentum.

Exclusion from these indexes would force passive funds like ETFs and mutual funds tracking the Nasdaq 100 or MSCI USA to sell their holdings, leading to significant outflows. JPMorgan analysts estimate. Up to $2.8 billion in passive fund outflows, based on nearly $9 billion in current market exposure tied to these benchmarks.

If Nasdaq 100 and other providers (e.g., MSCI World) follow suit, total outflows could reach $8-9 billion—roughly 15% of MicroStrategy’s $59 billion market cap. This could further pressure liquidity, raise borrowing costs, and dampen investor sentiment, signaling concerns over the company’s reliance on Bitcoin volatility.

On the flip side, Saylor has emphasized MicroStrategy’s resilience, positioning it as both a software business and a “Bitcoin treasury company.” Analysts highlighted reduced appeal for passive investors and long-term demand risks, noting index inclusion has historically boosted MicroStrategy’s valuation.

Monness, Crespi, Hardt recently upgraded MSTR from Sell to Neutral, citing a diminished premium over its Bitcoin NAV net asset value. Saylor continues to advocate for regulatory clarity to support crypto-exposed firms. The news coincides with Bitcoin’s slump, amplifying risks for MicroStrategy as a de facto Bitcoin proxy.

However, removal wouldn’t directly impact Bitcoin’s price unless it triggers panic selling. MicroStrategy’s situation remains fluid, with the January MSCI decision as a key watchpoint.

Since August 2020, when Strategy first adopted BTC as its primary holding, Saylor’s strategy has evolved from simple accumulation to a sophisticated “Bitcoin refinery” model—leveraging debt, equity, and innovative securities to amplify BTC exposure while generating yield for investors.

This isn’t passive holding; it’s active financial engineering designed to create shareholder value through BTC’s long-term appreciation, which Saylor projects at 30% annually over the next 20 years.

As of November 16, 2025, Strategy holds 649,870 BTC, acquired for ~$48.37 billion at an average price of $74,433 per BTC, representing about 3% of Bitcoin’s total supply and yielding 27.8% YTD in BTC terms.

Saylor’s philosophy boils down to this: In an era of fiat inflation and eroding cash value, Bitcoin is “digital gold 2.0″—a decentralized, engineered store of value that outperforms traditional assets like bonds, gold, or even the S&P 500 over time.

He argues that corporations holding cash are “losing 10-20% annually to inflation,” while BTC offers scarcity and portability, making it ideal for global capital efficiency. His approach has turned Strategy into a de facto BTC proxy, with $MSTR stock delivering ~75% average annual returns over the past five years—outpacing Bitcoin’s ~50% and far exceeding the S&P 500’s ~15%.

Saylor’s playbook is built on conviction, leverage, and innovation. Strategy buys BTC using excess cash flow from its $500 million annual software business, but primarily through capital raises.

Purchases are dollar-cost averaged (DCA) to mitigate volatility, with buys continuing regardless of price—recent examples include 8,178 BTC for $835.6 million at ~$102,171 (November 10-16, 2025) and 487 BTC for $49.9 million at ~$102,557 (November 3-9, 2025).

Saylor emphasizes “buy and hold” as the only rational long-term play, stating the firm can endure an 80-90% BTC drawdown for 4-5 years without defaulting, thanks to overcollateralization current leverage at 10-15%, trending to zero.

 Even at 0% annual BTC growth, Strategy has ~80 years of runway before dividends falter; at 1.25% growth, it sustains them indefinitely. Raise low-cost capital via convertible bonds, preferred stock, and at-the-market (ATM) equity offerings, then deploy it into BTC. This creates a “self-sustaining price escalation cycle”.

BTC appreciation boosts $MSTR’s market cap, enabling more raises at favorable terms. Recent innovations include “digital credit securities” like $STRK (convertible preferred), $STRF (fixed-yield), $STRD (dividend-focused), $STRC (Stretch, variable USD yield backed by BTC), and $STRE—raising $7.7 billion in 2025 alone.

These instruments “refine” BTC into yield products, stripping volatility for fixed-income investors while passing upside to equity holders. S&P Global’s ‘B-‘ rating in October 2025 marks the first for a BTC treasury firm, validating the structure.

BTC as a $200T asset by 2045, powering AI-driven finance and replacing sovereign debt with overcollateralized digital credit. Saylor predicts BTC will surpass gold’s market cap within a decade.

Analysts at Samosa Capital argue the strategy “hurts Bitcoin’s price action” by flooding markets during peaks—~40% of holdings are now underwater after buys above $102K. Parallels to Strategy’s 2000 dot-com crash stock fell 99% fuel warnings of implosion if BTC drops below $10K.

FG Nexus Ethereum DAT Sells 20% of ETH Holdings, as Kalshi Faces $650M Market Liquidation Risk

By
Paul Ugbede Godwin
-
0

FG Nexus Inc, a publicly traded Digital Asset Treasury (DAT) firm focused on Ethereum holdings and real-world asset (RWA) tokenization, announced the sale of approximately 10,922 ETH from its treasury.

This transaction, valued at around $31–33 million based on ETH prices near $2,850–$3,000 at the time, represented roughly 21% of its pre-sale ETH holdings approximately 50,927 ETH. The proceeds, combined with $10 million in borrowed funds, were used to repurchase 3.4 million shares—about 8% of its outstanding float—at an average price of $3.94 per share.

This move aims to address the firm’s market-to-net asset value (mNAV) trading below 1.0, where its stock price $2.41 as of November 20 close undervalues its underlying assets. As of November 19, 2025 pre-close of the announcement day.

DATs are publicly traded companies mostly NASDAQ/OTC whose primary business is to hold large amounts of a single cryptocurrency almost always Bitcoin or Ethereum as their core treasury asset, similar to how MicroStrategy holds BTC.

They raise capital by issuing equity or convertible debt, buy the crypto, and then hold or lightly stake it. Shareholders get leveraged exposure to the crypto price without directly owning the coin.

FG Nexus’s stock has plummeted ~37% in the past month and >85% over six months, down from a $40 peak in August 2025. This sale is part of an ongoing buyback program launched in October, targeting undervaluation to boost per-share NAV.

CEO Kyle Cerminara stated the firm will “continue buying back shares while our stock trades below NAV,” creating an “asymptotic effect” on valuation as shares decline and NAV per share rises. The company also stakes portions of its ETH for yield and issues SEC-registered shares on Ethereum via Securitize for on-chain trading.

The sale contributed to ETH dipping below $2,850 support on November 20, down 6% intraday amid broader crypto market weakness. On-chain data shows spot exchange ETH balances at historic lows 6.5 million ETH, but sales from DATs like FG Nexus highlight liquidity risks for treasury firms.

FG Nexus is the second major ETH treasury to sell assets for buybacks this month, following similar moves by peers like SharpLink Gaming. Earlier in 2025, firms accumulated aggressively via $5B shelf offerings, but plunging stocks have reversed some strategies.

Venture capital views this as unlikely to become widespread, but it raises questions about long-term holding commitments. Recent discussions emphasize the ~21% dump as a bearish signal for ETH, with users noting “DATs are selling” and speculating on buyers like ETFs or whales. “FG Nexus dumped 21% of their $ETH. DATs are selling. Guess who’s buying? ”

This development underscores volatility in the DAT sector, where ETH’s price crash below $3,000 has amplified pressures. While buybacks aim to unlock value for shareholders, they signal potential consolidation or shifts away from pure accumulation plays.

Most DATs trade at a discount to their Net Asset Value (NAV) — sometimes 30-70% below the actual value of their crypto holdings. Example: Company holds 50,000 ETH worth $150 million. Market cap = only $80 million ? trades at 0.53× NAV. This persistent discount is the central “game” that DAT management tries to solve.

Direct Crypto Sale ? Share Buyback; FG Nexus style; Sell a portion of ETH/BTC treasury on the open market ? use USD proceeds to repurchase and retire own shares. Instantly narrows or eliminates NAV discount; very visible accretion to remaining shareholders.

Direct selling pressure on the crypto price; reduces treasury size; signals “we don’t believe ETH will moon soon”. Issue low-interest convertible notes or fixed-income bonds (often 0–1% coupon) ? use proceeds to (a) buy more BTC/ETH and (b) repurchase shares.

Adds leverage; if crypto rises, huge upside. Buybacks still close discount | Massive dilution risk if conversion price is hit; interest burden if crypto crashes.

ATM Equity Offerings + Immediate Crypto Purchase + Buyback Later; Sell new shares via At-The-Market (ATM) facility when trading above NAV ? buy crypto ? when discount re-appears, use cash or sell tiny crypto slices for buybacks. Opportunistic; only raises capital when premium exists.

Very hard to execute because premium windows are rare and brief. Stake ETH or wrapped BTC on platforms ? use 3–6% annual yield in ETH to either (a) sell yield for USD buybacks or (b) compound ETH and claim “we never sell principal.” Looks more “HODL-friendly”; no principal sale.

Yield is small a few million $ per year for mid-sized DATs; slow impact. Sell 5–25% of holdings in tranches most common 2025 version. Pre-announce or quietly sell 5–25% of treasury over weeks/months via OTC or exchanges ? run aggressive buyback while discount <0.7×.

Balances “keep most of the upside” with aggressive discount closure | Still creates selling pressure; community often angry. FG offering to buy back 10–30% of shares at a fixed price slightly above market but still below NAV. Very powerful one-time accretion; cleans up float.

After selling 20% ETH & buying back 20% of shares. Same ETH per share, but far fewer shares ? remaining holders own same crypto exposure for much higher stock price. Bitcoin DATs (MSTR, Metaplanet, Semler Scientific) ? still mostly accumulate or use debt; very few outright sales.

Ethereum DATs (FG Nexus, SharpLink, Nine Realms) ? much more aggressive selling + buybacks because ETH underperformed BTC in 2025 and their discounts reached 60-80%. BTC maxis cheer MicroStrategy debt model; ETH community often calls selling DATs “traitors” or “fake accumulation.”

When a DAT trades at a deep discount, management faces intense pressure to either (1) sell some crypto and buy back shares or (2) issue cheap debt and double down. The first strategy closes the discount fastest but damages the “crypto treasury” narrative; the second keeps the narrative but adds leverage risk. Most 2025 Ethereum DATs have chosen door #1.

Kalshi Faces $650M Market Liquidation Risk Pending Massachusetts Court Ruling

Kalshi, a federally regulated prediction market platform designated by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), allows users to trade “event contracts” on outcomes like sports results.

These are binary options—essentially yes/no bets structured as financial derivatives—offered nationwide without state-specific gambling licenses.

However, Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell views them as unlicensed sports wagering, violating state laws that require operators to obtain a gaming license from the Massachusetts Gaming Commission.

This has led to ongoing litigation, with a critical hearing scheduled for December 9, 2025, in Suffolk County Superior Court. Kalshi argues federal law the Commodity Exchange Act preempts state gambling regulations, positioning its platform as a financial exchange rather than a sportsbook.

Massachusetts counters that Kalshi’s contracts mimic sports betting comparing them to FanDuel and expose users to addiction risks without state-mandated protections like age verification, funding caps, or taxes.

The $650 Million Liquidation Risk

In a November 19, 2025, court filing, Kalshi warned that if the court grants the state’s preliminary injunction request, it would be forced to immediately halt trading on Massachusetts-based contracts.

This could trigger the liquidation of approximately $650 million in open derivative positions—not just from Massachusetts users, but nationwide, as markets are interconnected.

Kalshi’s VP of Markets, Xavier Sottile, described this as creating a “false signal” to the market, disrupting users’ positions and potentially causing widespread havoc for traders across the U.S.A forced pause would: Prevent new trades on sports events involving Massachusetts residents.

Require unwinding existing contracts at current values, leading to immediate gains/losses for holders. Impact integrated platforms like Robinhood, which intermediates Kalshi trades and has separately sued to block enforcement.

Kalshi estimates this as a “disastrous” outcome, emphasizing that prediction markets are a “critical innovation” for hedging risks, not gambling. The state, however, prioritizes public health, citing harms like compulsive gambling and financial losses.

This isn’t isolated—Kalshi faces similar challenges in over a dozen states:Wins: Preliminary injunctions in Nevada and New Jersey federal courts, blocking state enforcement. Denied in Maryland; Nevada judge is reconsidering its injunction; cease-and-desist letters from Arizona, Illinois, and Montana.

Kalshi is appealing a CFTC denial of sports contracts to the Third Circuit. A parallel Robinhood federal suit in Massachusetts was dismissed on November 13, 2025, sending the case to state court— non-appealable, heightening risks.

Experts predict escalation to the U.S. Supreme Court, especially as competitors like DraftKings, FanDuel, Polymarket, and ProphetX eye similar products. The President Donald Trump administration may favor deregulation, given ties to prediction markets.

AG suit claims unlicensed wagering; $650M risk if halted. Injunction granted, but reversal likely. Judge leaning against Kalshi post-reconsideration.

The December 9, 2025 upcoming ruling could set a precedent: approval of the injunction forces Kalshi’s hand on liquidations, while denial reinforces federal oversight. Kalshi vows to “defend [its] innovations in court,” but a loss might prompt appeals or operational pauses.

For Kalshi users, monitor open positions closely whereby abrupt changes could affect portfolios. This case highlights the tension between innovation in financial tools and state control over gambling, with billions in market value at stake industry-wide.

UK Launches Major Crypto Fraud Probe with Arrests Tied to $28M Basis Markets Collapse

By
Paul Ugbede Godwin
-
0

The Serious Fraud Office (SFO), the country’s primary agency for investigating serious financial crimes, has described this as its first major investigation into crypto-related fraud. Here’s a breakdown of what happened, based on official statements and reporting.

Two men—one in his 40s and the other in his 30s—were detained on suspicion of fraud and money laundering. Their identities haven’t been publicly disclosed, but one may be linked to Adam Cobb-Webb, a 48-year-old UK national previously fined $150,000 by the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) in 2023 for market manipulation in oil futures.

Coordinated raids occurred on November 20 in Herne Hill south London and Bradford West Yorkshire. The men were released on bail pending further inquiries. The probe stems from the 2022 collapse of Basis Markets, a project that raised approximately $28 million from investors in late 2021 but allegedly diverted funds to personal wallets without delivering any product.

Basis Markets pitched itself as a “decentralized hedge fund” offering “delta-neutral” yields through sophisticated arbitrage basis trades—strategies typically reserved for institutional investors. The team claimed over 80 years of combined experience in traditional finance, software, and crypto.

Despite assurances of locked team allocations and a project treasury, investigators found funds were funneled directly to founders’ personal wallets. No platform was built, and the project shut down months later without refunds.

Pitch materials hyped unrealistic returns, like a single NFT earning up to $18,000 monthly by year three later revised down but still inflated. Founders reportedly flaunted luxury purchases like watches in their Discord community.

This fits the pattern of “rug pulls” from the 2021 crypto boom, where hype around NFTs and DeFi lured retail investors into unaccountable schemes. The SFO is urging victims and whistleblowers to come forward, signaling this could be the start of a wave of prosecutions.

It reflects a national strategy to tackle digital asset crimes, especially as the UK pushes for crypto regulation via the Financial Services and Markets Act 2023. Blockchain forensics and NFT traceability were key to tracing funds.

Similar probes are underway elsewhere—e.g., the U.S. SEC’s actions against high-profile rug pulls. This case highlights ongoing risks in crypto, even years later, and may deter future fraud by emphasizing accountability.

The investigation is ongoing, with potential for more arrests. The SFO is analyzing blockchain transactions from the sales. A basis trade is a low-risk arbitrage strategy that exploits small price differences (“basis”) between two closely related assets.

In traditional finance, the most famous version is the cash-and-carry trade in futures markets (e.g., Treasury futures vs. actual bonds, or Bitcoin futures vs. spot Bitcoin). In crypto, the basis trade almost always refers to: Long spot Bitcoin or ETH + Short perpetual futures or quarterly futures at a higher price

You lock in the difference (the “basis”) as nearly risk-free profit. Immediately short the same amount of BTC on a perpetual futures exchange using cross-margin or stablecoin-margin. You are now delta-neutral no net directional exposure. Collect funding rate payments from the short perpetual position. This is the key profit source.

Hold the position until the basis shrinks or you decide to unwind. Profit = cumulative funding received minus borrowing costs and fees. Unlike traditional markets, crypto perpetual futures almost always trade at a premium to spot because:Most retail traders are long-only and leveraged ? they pay funding to shorts.

Funding rates can stay positive for months or even years especially in bull markets. Example historical rates: 2021 bull market: often 0.05–0.30% per 8 hours ?18–100% annualized. 2024–2025 bull market: frequently 0.01–0.10% per 8 hours ?10–80% annualized on good days.

When funding is positive ? shorts get paid by longs ? basis traders (who are short) earn steady yield.Simplified Profit & Loss Example (2025 numbers)You run a $1 million basis trade when funding is 0.05% every 8 hours

In late 2024 and early 2025, large hedge funds like Millennium, Balyasny, Exodus, etc. reportedly made hundreds of millions doing exactly this trade.  Risks Funding rate flips negative ? You start paying instead of receiving happened briefly in crashes. Exchange insolvency or forced liquidation.

Margin calls if you over-leverage the short leg. Opportunity cost — your capital is tied up earning 20–40% instead of going 5× long in a bull run. The fraudulent project Basis Markets  promised investors they were running sophisticated basis trades and other delta-neutral strategies with decades of TradFi experience.

In reality, they allegedly just took the money and never executed any trades — classic rug pull dressed up in impressive-sounding hedge-fund jargon. The crypto basis trade = buy spot Bitcoin, short the same amount in perpetual futures, collect funding payments from leveraged longs.

It’s one of the closest things crypto has to a “risk-free” trade, which is why real hedge funds love it — and why scammers love name-dropping it.

Congrats Eloquent AI, And Welcome to Tekedia Capital

By
Ndubuisi Ekekwe
-
0

Tekedia Capital congratulates our portfolio startup, Eloquent AI, for winning the Money 20/20 Award for Novel Technologies.

This prestigious award honors the boldest innovators shaping the future of money and the global financial ecosystem. Winners were selected from hundreds of worldwide entries by an independent jury of more than 40 leading fintech experts.

At Tekedia Capital, we have always believed that Eloquent AI is building the most amazing Financial AI Operator in this emerging era of AI. Their recognition on the world stage affirms that belief.

Eloquent AI, win the future.

1...129130131...7,952Page 130 of 7,952

© Tekedia. All rights reserved.

Term & Privacy

© Tekedia. All rights reserved.

Term & Privacy