DD
MM
YYYY

CATEGORIES

PAGES

DD
MM
YYYY

spot_img

CATEGORIES

PAGES

Home Blog Page 3181

Drum of Solana ETPs and ETFs Deepens

By
Paul Ugbede Godwin
-
0

The landscape of cryptocurrency investment products is evolving rapidly, and the drumbeat for Solana-based Exchange Traded Products (ETPs) and Exchange Traded Funds (ETFs) is growing louder. Solana, a high-performance blockchain supporting decentralized applications and crypto currencies, has been gaining significant attention from investors and financial institutions alike.

Recent developments suggest that the potential for Solana ETPs and ETFs is being taken seriously by major players in the financial markets. For instance, VanEck, a global investment manager, has filed for a Solana ETF in the United States. This move indicates a growing confidence in Solana’s market demand and its network’s decentralization, which are key factors considered by ETF issuers.

Moreover, the political climate plays a crucial role in the regulatory landscape for cryptocurrencies. Market-making firm GSR suggests that a change in the U.S. presidency could lead to a more favorable environment for the approval of Solana ETFs. The firm speculates that if former President Donald Trump were to be re-elected, his administration might implement regulations that allow for the launch of spot digital asset ETFs, potentially benefiting Solana significantly.

The ASOL ETP boasts an impressive Net Asset Value (NAV) of over $811 million as of June 28, 2024, with a Year-To-Date (YTD) return of 40.15%, despite a 1-day change of -4.24%. The staking yield stands at 4.44%, reflecting the potential for substantial returns on investment.

Furthermore, 21Shares has filed for regulatory approval to launch a Solana Spot ETF, following a similar move by VanEck. This filing comes in the wake of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) approval of spot Bitcoin and Ethereum ETFs earlier this year. The proposed ETF would be tied to the spot price of Solana, offering investors another avenue to gain exposure to this high-performance blockchain platform.

The interest in Solana as an investment vehicle is not unfounded. Solana’s design addresses the critical pain points of the Ethereum network, offering superior speed and capacity, which is essential for advanced financial applications. The network’s resilience and the growing developer community further bolster its position as a formidable contender in the crypto space.

The move by 21Shares to file for a Solana Spot ETF is indicative of the growing confidence in Solana’s market potential. With the Chicago Board Options Exchange (CBOE) set to list the ETFs upon approval, investors are keenly watching the developments, as evidenced by the surge in Solana’s price following the filings.

The deepening drum of Solana ETPs and ETFs reflects the evolving landscape of cryptocurrency investments. With firms like 21Shares leading the charge, the future looks promising for investors looking to diversify their portfolios with innovative crypto-based financial products. As the regulatory environment continues to adapt, the potential for these products to reshape the investment paradigm is immense.

The anticipation around Solana ETFs is not without its challenges. The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has designated Solana among the 19 tokens as unregistered securities, which complicates the approval process for a Solana ETF. Despite these hurdles, the interest in Solana as an investment vehicle continues to grow, with Canadian firm 3iQ filing preliminary prospects for the first Solana ETP.

The excitement around Solana ETPs and ETFs is not just about the potential financial gains. It also reflects a broader trend of increasing institutional acceptance of cryptocurrencies. As the infrastructure for crypto investment matures, with more regulated products entering the market, it could lead to greater stability and legitimacy for the entire sector.

Investors are keenly watching the developments in this space, as the approval of Solana ETPs and ETFs could open the doors to a new era of crypto investment products, offering diversified exposure to this innovative and rapidly growing asset class. The deepening drum of Solana ETPs and ETFs is a testament to the evolving nature of investment in the digital age, where traditional finance and cutting-edge technology converge.

Nigeria’s Electricity DisCos Announce New Tariff Hike for Band A Customers Amid Economic Strain

By
Samuel Nwite
-
0

Nigeria’s electricity distribution companies (DisCos) have announced an upward review of electricity tariffs for Band A customers, set to take effect from July 1, 2024. The increase, disclosed by various DisCos on their X handles, follows an April directive by the Nigerian Electricity Regulatory Commission (NERC) for an immediate tariff hike.

The new tariff will increase prices from N206.80/kWh to N209.5/kWh. NERC Vice Chairman, Musiliu Oseni, stated in April that only 15 percent of electricity consumers would be affected by this hike, which aims to adjust prices to N225 ($0.15) per kilowatt-hour from N68.

The decision to raise tariffs initially sparked significant backlash. On April 30, the House of Representatives requested NERC to suspend the tariff hike pending an investigation. This resolution was prompted by a motion from Kama Nkem-Kanma (LP, Ebonyi), who criticized the arbitrary and discriminatory nature of the policy.

In response to the House’s resolution, DisCos announced a temporary tariff reduction on May 6, lowering the Band A customer rate from N225/kWh to N206.80/kWh. However, the recent announcement indicates a new upward adjustment to N209.5/kWh, with tariffs for Bands B, C, D, and E remaining unchanged.

Various DisCos have issued statements announcing the tariff changes.

Port Harcourt Electricity Distribution Plc (PHED) said: “Dear esteemed customers, please be informed that there is an upward tariff review for our Band A feeders from N206.80/kWh to N209.5/kwh effective 1st July 2024. The guaranteed availability of a minimum of 20 hours per day still stands. The tariff for Bands B, C, D, and E remains unchanged.”

In its announcement, Kaduna Electricity Distribution Company (Kaduna Electric) declared: “Dear esteemed customers, the management of Kaduna Electric informs the public of an upward review in the tariff of Band A feeders from N206.80/kWh to N209.5/kWh. The review is effective from 1st July 2024 and affects prepaid and postpaid customers. Kaduna Electric assures customers on its Band A feeders of the continued availability of 20-24 hours daily as stipulated in the service-based tariff regime. The public should please note that the tariff for Bands B, C, D, and E remains unchanged.”

Economic Impact of the New Tariff Get Weightier

The tariff increase has sent shockwaves through Nigeria’s manufacturing sector, leading to the closure of over 300 companies and the loss of 380,000 jobs since April 2024, according to the Manufacturers Association of Nigeria (MAN).

MAN has voiced deep concerns over the crippling impact of the tariff hike, noting that electricity costs now constitute about 40% of production overheads for manufacturers. This has severely affected their financial viability, leading to widespread job losses and factory shutdowns.

Senator Ahmed Abdulkadir, speaking on behalf of MAN at an investigative hearing organized by the Joint Committees on Power, Commerce, National Planning & Economic Development, and Delegated Legislation, criticized NERC’s process.

He asserted that the April 3, 2024, supplementary order raising the tariff was never properly communicated to the public and accused DisCos of neglecting consumer consultation guidelines.

“Electricity costs now make up a significant portion of production overheads, making it nearly impossible for manufacturers to remain financially viable. The result has been widespread job losses and factory shutdowns,” Abdulkadir said, highlighting the detrimental effects of the tariff on the real economy.

The education sector has also been severely impacted by the tariff hike. Higher institutions are struggling to pay exorbitant electricity bills, with the University of Port Harcourt reportedly paying as much as N30 million for one month.

Others, such as the University of Benin, University of Jos, and Aliko Dangote University have been disconnected from the national grid for their inability to pay the exorbitant bills.

Deborah Tolu-Kolawole, an education reporter with the Punch, highlighted these issues on X, urging for intervention to save the universities from collapse.

She said, “It is time to speak therefore I will not be silent. Our universities are collapsing over rising cost of electricity. Some universities such as University of Benin, University of Jos, Aliko Dangote University have been disconnected from the national grid. The electricity bill of the University of Ilorin is now N230M per month, and ABU says it can no longer survive. Save our universities from collapse.”

In defense of the tariff hike, Minister of Power Adebayo Adelabu argued that the Federal Government could no longer sustain the N3 trillion subsidy for electricity. He highlighted that the removal of subsidies for Band A customers was essential to prevent the government from accruing unsustainable debts.

Recently, a Lagos High Court temporarily ordered NERC and ten DisCos not to implement the new tariffs following a suit filed by MAN challenging the hike. The court’s decision came after MAN filed a suit challenging the tariff hike.

Additionally, in May, the House of Representatives ordered NERC to suspend the implementation of the new tariff order. Despite these interventions, NERC has continued to bill Band A customers according to the new tariff order.

There isn’t , wasn’t, and won’t be, a ‘Web 2’

By
John Mc Keown
-
0

Rigveda 2-2 : There isn’t, wasn’t and won’t be a Web2.

Nobody can clarify when Web 1 ended and when the highly subjective ‘Web2’ is supposed to have started.

 

No clear launch date, technology (or collection of technologies) release, between two (supposed) different iterations of web.

The first ever web domain was symbolics.com, registered in 1985 by Symbolics Inc, a US computer company.

People talk about the move from a ‘declarative’ web to a ‘participatory’ ‘interactive’ and ‘engagement’ led web, but all the evidence is, that this was a gradually evolving process where individual technologies came along, distinctly, separately, and during different time frames to move the needle.

Slowly over a two-decade plus period, increased internet bandwidth, higher performance and smaller chip design, innovative coding technologies,  larger memory, better cameras, and improvements in graphics handling chips, all contributed to an ever improving ‘rich content’, and the interactive solutions that could share it, and communicate about it.

Facebook was in a Social Media Space on its own before it saw competition from products such as Twitter, Instagram and Tik Tok, but it was by no means the first Social Media Platform. Facebook was preceded by  Friendster, MySpace, and Hi5. The granddaddy of them all, SixDegrees, was released in 1997.

The first mention of Web 2 didn’t come until around 2009. Two things happened in this period. It was the year Pinterest was launched, but more important, it was also the seed of Bitcoin’s popularization.

Web 2 didn’t start to get regular mentions until this decade, and that has been usually in the context of people attempting to misrepresent Web 3.

The rise of the ‘Silos’

‘Silos’ are platforms within which an internet-based business attempts to snare internet users keeping them and their ‘traffic’ internal as long as possible.

The first silos were ‘portals’, which were a collection of stand-alone applications, all accessible from their home page. They were the start of ‘interactive’ web and included general articles, a forum, shopping, a ticker line with news feed, a free text message service and games (non-exhaustive list).

Portals began to appear around 1995, long before the advent of smartphones.

Examples of Portals were Yahoo and AoL. Portals contained multiple unconnected features under an umbrella and were sometimes owned by partners or business subscribers.

Gradually as individual new technologies came along, portals mutated into Social Media with the advent of Six Degrees in 1997.

Online Platforms did not reach ‘Silo Status’ at either the birth of Portals, or Social Media. It was a gradual process with no clear ‘tipping point’.

Gradually as technology became increasingly sophisticated, particularly with the advent of ‘cloud’ and phone ‘apps’, leading tech companies not initially in Portals or Platforms began to develop their own Silos, including Microsoft, Google and Amazon.

The gradual development of Silos over 3 decades mirrored the equally gradually improving Web across the spectrum of the same timelines.

The DO NOT represent a separate iteration of Web.

Google and Meta, just like single individuals, are ‘just another web user’.

No evidence of mass awareness or acceptance of a second successive iteration of ‘Pre-blockchain’ Web.

As we look through archives and footprints online, over time, we cannot find any broad acceptance of ‘Web 2’ in the age of ‘legacy web’ i.e. the pre-blockchain era of Web. When we look at old archives of online content, such as a ‘roll back’ of Wikipedia, or the ‘Wayback Machine’ which can give us snapshots of internet content in bygone times, we can see nobody promoting themselves as a professional in any aspect of ‘Web2’, in any online profile anywhere.

Why? Well, because it never existed.

Never an industry association or Internet/Web Authority issuance of a set of specifications to be met by (supposed) ‘Web 2’ and with a clear demarcation between it, and a (supposed) Web 1.

Different Associations and Authorities set the standards across all things Hardware, Software, IoT, Internet and Web.

For example, there are USB standards differences between USB 3.1 Gen 1 and the latest Gen 2.

There are clear and measurable specification differences in phone signal transmission, that distinguish between 3G, 4G and 5G transmissions.

For WIFI, we have equally clear sets of standards that separate WIFI 5, WIFI 6 and WIFI 6E.

Advocates of a division of ‘Legacy’ (pre-blockchain) Web into a (supposed) Web1 and Web2, cannot cite any authority prevailing over the change, the specification and standards required, or the ‘watershed’ moment at which it is supposed to have happened.

Instead, what we have is ‘Web 3’ professionals, or ‘Web 3 aware’ enthusiasts, looking at ‘Legacy Web’ pointing to divergent differences across the evolution spectrum, and retrospectively claiming them to be ‘Web1’ and ‘Web2’.

There is no sense of specifications and standards, nor tech driver watershed.

The pre-Web3 world is very meticulous in this regard. The looseness and woolliness around the supposed Web 2 sounds like degen speak in Web 3.

 

If Web2 were a thing, then those who supposedly use it all the time, but don’t know about Web 3, would not only know about it, they would be the most to talk or write about it.

With every growth of technology, while there are those who jump in both feet first as early adopters, there are also those who stay in the legacy age, even though the writing is on the wall.

Yes, – hydrocarbon burning electricity stations moved on to nuclear power, and then on to different types of eco-power.

Horse drawn carts moved on to Internal Combustion Engines (ICEs) and we are in transition to an age of Electric Vehicles (EVs).

Those who are stubborn about the outdated technology may not even know about what comes next, but they sure know about the one they understand and commit to.

So if this ‘Web 2’ really existed, isn’t it reasonable to think that those with absolutely no concept of Web 3, but seasoned in this ‘Web 2’ field would be talking and writing about it?

Well they don’t!.

All of the content in online platforms that mentions Web 2, are advocates, or somehow involved with Web 3.

When Henry Ford mass produced the Ford Model T, he promoted mass ICE vehicle product. He was confident in his own vision for ICE, and didn’t concern himself with the history of horses, or iterations of horse breeding evolution.

He was an advocate for ICE transport advancement and he left horses for the horse folk.

The reality is folk feigning Web 3, invented Web 2 as a crutch to explain away Web 3 founding concepts rooted in decentralization, and 9ja Cosmos’ Rigveda 2-1.

By drawing fancy iconograms, they create a false pretext of product evolution, deflecting Web 3 to a product based entity, and away from its user state entity as an ‘end-to-end decentralized UX’.

People in legacy Web, and not connected with Web3 in any way, don’t write of Web 2. There was no avalanche of online content about Web 2 between Six Degrees in 1997 and the advent of Bitcoin in 2008.

Since the legacy Web incumbents don’t even acknowledge Web 2 existence, There isn’t, wasn’t and won’t be a Web2.

Rigveda 2 – 1 : Web 3 is as an ‘End-to-End Decentralized UX’

Rigveda 2 – 2 : ‘There isn’t, wasn’t and won’t be a Web2’

9ja Cosmos is here…

Get your .9jacom and .9javerse Web 3 domains  for $4 at:

.9jacom Domains

.9javerse Domains

.det0x Domains

Preview our Sino Amazon/Sinosignia releases (Ente)

Preview our Sino Amazon/Sinosignia releases (Pinterest)

Visit 9ja Cosmos LinkedIn Page

Visit 9ja Cosmos Website

 

USDC Gets Critical MiCA Approval, Fueling Surge for Cosmos, Jupiter, and DTX Exchange

By
TI Partners
-
1

Stablecoins have emerged as a vital component of the cryptocurrency market, offering price stability and facilitating seamless transactions. The recent news of USDC, the world’s leading dollar-backed stablecoin, securing critical approval under the European Union’s Markets in Crypto Assets (MiCA) regulation has sent ripples of excitement throughout the industry.

This landmark decision is poised to accelerate the adoption of USDC (USDC) and other stablecoins, with positive implications for innovative projects like Cosmos (ATOM), Jupiter (JUP), and DTX Exchange. Let’s dive into the details!

USDC Secures Critical MiCA Approval

On July 1st, Circle announced a significant milestone for both the company and the future of cryptocurrency in the European Union. Circle has become the first global stablecoin issuer to fully comply with the new EU regulations under the Markets in Crypto Assets (MiCA) framework. This compliance allows Circle to officially issue USD Coin (USDC) and Euro Coin (EURC) to European customers, regulated by the Autorité de Contrôle Prudentiel et de Résolution (ACPR) in France.

The introduction of these stablecoins under MiCA regulations marks a pivotal moment in digital currency evolution. Circle’s vision, started over a decade ago, aimed to leverage blockchain for creating and adopting fiat digital currencies on open networks. Today’s announcement fulfills that vision in the European market.

The EU’s MiCA regulation establishes a clear legal framework for cryptocurrencies. By receiving the first stablecoin approval under MiCA, USDC gains regulatory recognition, enhancing its legitimacy and stability, and paving the way for broader institutional adoption and mainstream acceptance within the EU.

Cosmos (ATOM) Hints at Bullish Rebound with Recent Price Action

Cosmos (ATOM) is exhibiting signs of potential resurgence, hovering in the range of $6.39 to $7.10. This recent price movement suggests a bullish upswing, with a gain of over 2.7% observed in the past 24 hours.

Looking at technical indicators, the Relative Strength Index (RSI) sits at nearly 56, and the Stochastic indicator hovers around 71. These readings suggest that buying pressure might be building for ATOM. If bulls can successfully overcome the resistance level at $7.46, the next potential target could be around $8.17, representing a promising growth of over 20% from current levels.

Traders should keep a close eye on the $6.04 support level, as it will serve as a crucial indicator of the strength and sustainability of this potential upward movement.

Jupiter (JUP) on the Rise: Bullish Indicators Point to Potential Price Surge

Jupiter (JUP) is exhibiting promising signs in its price movement. Currently trading within a range of $0.70 to $0.91, the JUP token has experienced a notable 8.72% increase over the past week. While a 20% drop occurred in the last month, Jupiter’s impressive 2668% surge over the past six months underscores its strong potential for future growth.

Analysts believe bulls are positioned to break past the nearest resistance level at $1.01, with their sights set on the $1.22 mark next. This would represent a significant increase of around 34% from the upper end of its current trading range. Further bolstering the bullish sentiment are technical indicators like a rising RSI and a positive MACD. With these bullish factors in play, all eyes are on Jupiter as it prepares to potentially reach new price highs.

DTX Exchange: A Transparent, Secure, and Efficient Platform Revolutionizing Cryptocurrency Trading

DTX Exchange is quickly becoming a powerful player in the cryptocurrency exchange market, captivating the crypto community with its dedication to transparency, security, and efficiency.

This exchange employs a hybrid approach using distributed liquidity pools, aggregating liquidity from multiple sources to create a more efficient trading environment and significantly reduce slippage. This approach combines the security and privacy benefits of decentralized exchanges with the improved liquidity of centralized platforms.

DTX Exchange also offers innovative features, including 1000x leverage without Know Your Customer (KYC) requirements, catering to experienced traders seeking higher returns, and eliminating traditional KYC barriers.

Fueled by an ambitious vision to become a major player in the cryptocurrency exchange landscape, DTX Exchange is currently in the second stage of its presale. At $0.04 per token, this represents a 100% increase from the first stage, with prices expected to rise further to $0.06 in the next stage. Don’t miss out on this exciting opportunity to be a part of the DTX Exchange revolution.

Learn more:

Visit DTX Presale

Read Whitepaper

Join The DTX Community

The One Oasis Strategy – Definition, Context and Limitation

By
Ndubuisi Ekekwe
-
1

Summary

  • The One Oasis Strategy involves identifying the best product in a business and structuring investments to support that product, reducing market risks and ensuring demand for new investments.
  • Every company has an “oasis,” with the best product serving as the focal point for investments and growth.
  • Amazon exemplifies the One Oasis Strategy by investing in an in-house cloud infrastructure to support its ecommerce business, ensuring minimal risk and eventually expanding to offer cloud services externally.
  • Samsung utilizes the One Oasis Strategy by having its semiconductor business serve its mobile devices unit, driving innovation and ensuring a competitive edge in the market. Samsung’s semiconductor business’s close relationship with its mobile devices unit gives it a strategic advantage over competitors, as it can innovate without external customer dependencies.
  • The One Oasis Strategy focuses on creating solutions with internal customers first, reducing market risks and allowing for strategic resource deployment.
  • By identifying the best product within a business and building around it, companies can secure their positions in the market and drive innovation effectively.
  • The One Oasis Strategy emphasizes the importance of leveraging internal strengths and customer relationships to drive business growth and success.
  • Ndubuisi Ekekwe, Lead Faculty of Tekedia Institute, conceptualized the One Oasis Strategy which has been adopted by many startups. He postulated about it in the Harvard Business Review here.

Context

In the realm of business strategies, the concept of the One Oasis Strategy has emerged as a compelling approach for companies seeking sustained growth and market resilience. This strategy revolves around identifying a company’s standout product or service and channeling investments and resources towards bolstering its success. By focusing on this core offering, businesses can minimize market risks, leverage internal strengths, and cultivate innovation to fortify their competitive position.

Companies like Amazon and Samsung in the technology sector have exemplified the power of strategic investment and resource allocation in driving long-term success. Through targeted approaches to investment and growth, these industry giants have navigated the competitive landscape with a keen eye on innovation, customer relationships, and differentiation.

Recent events in the business world have underscored the relevance of focused investment strategies like the One Oasis Strategy. As companies across various industries seek to optimize their operations for sustained growth, examples abound of organizations aligning their resources behind key products or services to mitigate risks and drive profitability. The evolution of business strategies over time has seen a shift towards more deliberate approaches to investment that prioritize core competencies and market opportunities.

Looking ahead, advancements in technology coupled with evolving market conditions are poised to shape how companies adapt their strategies to remain agile amidst competitive pressures. By exploring how this strategy can transcend industry boundaries while also considering potential drawbacks such as vulnerability to external disruptions or changing consumer preferences, businesses can chart a course towards enduring success in an ever-evolving marketplace characterized by innovation and strategic foresight.

Limitation

Yet, in the realm of strategic business planning, the One Oasis Strategy, which advocates for concentrating investments and resources around a single flagship product, may present notable vulnerabilities that warrant careful consideration. While the strategy aims to streamline operations and foster innovation by focusing on a core offering, it runs the risk of over-reliance on a singular product.

This narrow focus could leave companies vulnerable to market fluctuations, technological disruptions, or shifts in consumer preferences that could jeopardize their long-term sustainability. Diversification strategies may offer a more resilient approach by spreading risks across multiple products or business lines, providing a buffer against unforeseen challenges.

Moreover, the One Oasis Strategy’s emphasis on internal innovation and customer relationships may inadvertently limit companies’ adaptability and responsiveness to external market forces. By primarily catering to internal customers and insulating themselves from external feedback and market dynamics, organizations could miss out on valuable insights that drive broader industry trends or identify emerging opportunities beyond their immediate ecosystem.

That noted, balancing internal strengths with external perspectives through diversified feedback channels can enhance strategic agility and better position companies to navigate complex competitive landscapes with greater foresight and flexibility.

I am Ndubuisi Ekekwe; pick a course in our business school and advance your career or business.

1...3,1803,1813,182...8,740Page 3,181 of 8,740

© Tekedia. All rights reserved.

Term & Privacy

© Tekedia. All rights reserved.

Term & Privacy