Δημοφιλή άρθρα στο Binance Square

$XRP The crypto market often becomes a magnet for extreme narratives whenever volatility, uncertainty, or social media virality collide. Traders regularly encounter bold claims that blur the line between satire, speculation, and serious market commentary. When discussions touch Bitcoin’s origins or XRP’s long-term value, reactions tend to intensify, especially when predictions challenge widely accepted market realities.
A provocative post by trader Demetrius Remmiegius sparked renewed debate on X, spreading rapidly through crypto circles. The statement tied dramatic price projections for Bitcoin and XRP to claims about the identity of Bitcoin’s creator, triggering widespread debate and skepticism among analysts and investors.
👉The Satoshi Nakamoto Question Remains Unresolved
Despite persistent rumors and theories over the years, no credible or verified evidence has confirmed the identity of Satoshi Nakamoto. Researchers, cryptographers, and blockchain forensic experts continue to treat Satoshi’s identity as unknown. Major financial institutions, regulators, and market participants operate under the same assumption.
No official documents, cryptographic proof, or signed messages from early Bitcoin wallets have surfaced to validate any identity claim. As a result, markets have not priced Bitcoin based on any confirmed revelation regarding its creator.

👉Examining the Bitcoin Price Collapse Claim
The prediction that Bitcoin could fall to $2,000 within weeks would require a market collapse exceeding 95% from recent levels. Such a move would demand systemic failure across exchanges, custodians, miners, institutional treasuries, and global liquidity channels.
Current on-chain metrics, miner behavior, exchange reserves, and macroeconomic indicators do not support this scenario. While Bitcoin remains volatile, no data suggests an imminent structural breakdown that can result in such a rapid and extreme decline.
👉XRP’s $104,000 Projection and Market Constraints
The claim that XRP could reach $104,333 relies on symbolic references rather than measurable valuation frameworks. Proponents of XRP frequently emphasize its utility in facilitating cross-border transactions, enhancing liquidity, and fostering institutional adoption. However, even the most optimistic financial models account for supply dynamics, capital inflows, and realistic adoption curves.
A six-figure XRP valuation would imply a market capitalization far exceeding global financial benchmarks, including total worldwide liquidity pools. No credible economic model currently supports such an outcome.
👉Cultural References Versus Financial Analysis
References to The Simpsons have become part of crypto folklore due to coincidental past alignments. Analysts generally interpret these references as lighthearted cultural nods rather than reliable indicators. Sound market analysis depends on transparent assumptions, data-driven models, and verifiable inputs.
👉Separating Virality From Fundamentals
Demetrius Remmiegius’ post reflects the type of viral speculation that often appears during emotionally charged market phases. While such statements attract attention, they do not change Bitcoin’s fundamentals or XRP’s economic constraints.
For traders, the episode reinforces a familiar lesson. Markets respond to liquidity, adoption, regulation, and macro conditions, not unverified identities or symbolic mathematics.

🚀🚀🚀 FOLLOW BE_MASTER BUY_SMART 💰💰💰
Appreciate the work. 😍 Thank You. 👍 FOLLOW BeMaster BuySmart 🚀 TO FIND OUT MORE $$$$$ 🤩 BE MASTER BUY SMART 💰🤩
🚀🚀🚀 PLEASE CLICK FOLLOW BE MASTER BUY SMART - Thank You.

Most people don’t lose in crypto because the market is impossible.
They lose because they bring the wrong mindset.
Crypto rewards patience, discipline, and timing not emotions.
Let me explain it clearly.
Most people buy after a coin already did a 2x or 5x…
because Twitter is loud and everyone is screaming “next pump.”
They don’t buy early.
They buy late when smart money is already taking profits.
Then they sell too early.
Not because the setup failed…
but because they’re scared to lose small gains.
They exit winners too fast,
and hold losers too long.
Another big mistake?
Chasing missed entries.
Price moves without them,
so they jump in out of emotion.
That’s not strategy.
That’s gambling.
And the worst one…
Trading with money they can’t afford to manage calmly.
When you trade scared,
you will always make the wrong decision.
Early crypto is not for emotional traders.
That mindset will never survive here.
The ones who win are simple:
They stay patient.
They wait for levels.
They manage risk.
They think long-term.
That’s how you last in this market.

#TrumpEndsShutdown #USIranStandoff #KevinWarshNominationBullOrBear #xAICryptoExpertRecruitment #TrumpProCrypto

Coin- #SOLUSDT!
Signal- Short.
We can taken confirmation of Solana falling. For me the price of Solana will not go above 102.69$ before taking the liquidity from down below.

$SOL

Chiliz Unveils 2030 Manifesto: Charting the Future of SportFi with Real World Assets, DeFi Integration, and US Market Re-Entry
Marking the company’s eighth anniversary, the pioneer of sports blockchain announces ambitious roadmap to unlock $1 trillion sports industry opportunity through tokenization, enhanced Fan Token economics, and institutional-grade infrastructure
LONDON, 3 February 2025:— The Chiliz Group, the world’s leading blockchain provider for the sports and entertainment industry,  today published its Chiliz 2030 Manifesto, outlining a comprehensive vision to transform the company into the foundational financial infrastructure layer for global sports. 
Since launching the first Fan Tokens in 2018, The Chiliz Group has delivered over $700 million in new income to sports partners, facilitated a $1 billion+ Fan Token market cap at its 2025 peak, and built partnerships with more than 70 global sporting organizations. The manifesto marks a strategic evolution from this engagement-focused foundation toward unlocking the broader tokenization opportunity in sports – estimated to reach $1 trillion in real world assets (RWAs) by 2030.
“Eight years ago, we took a leap of faith that fans deserved more than passive consumption,” said Alexandre Dreyfus, CEO of Chiliz. “Today, we enter the next chapter: evolving beyond fan engagement to become the financial infrastructure layer for global sports. The convergence of regulatory clarity, institutional capital flowing into tokenized assets, and the RWA era creates an unprecedented opportunity – and we’re uniquely positioned to lead it.”
From engagement to financial infrastructure
At the core of the manifesto is a three-pillar strategy designed to move Fan Tokens and SportFi into a new phase of maturity. The first pillar focuses on the next stage of growth for Fan Tokens. The Chiliz Group plans to expand Fan Token distribution by going omni-chain in Q1 2026, starting with leading high-velocity blockchains to increase liquidity and unlock further DeFi opportunities. The company is also working toward re-entering the US market in 2026, with the first US partnership expected to be announced in Q1, and aims to launch further national team Fan Tokens on Socios.com this summer. 
A gamified tokenomics system (Fan Token Play) will link token supply to real-world match outcomes: when teams win, tokens burn; when they lose, more are minted. This innovation creates what Chiliz calls “a gamified digital asset market for sport” that mirrors the competitive, seasonal nature of sports itself.
The second pillar centres on the evolution of Chiliz Chain as the global ledger for sports finance. As Fan Tokens and SportFi products mature, the chain will support advanced DeFi functionality such as staking, lending, prediction markets, and the use of Fan Tokens as collateral, while aligning ecosystem growth with long-term value creation through perpetual $CHZ buy-backs funded by Fan Token revenues.
The third pillar introduces sports RWAs. Building on the first Chiliz Chain project tokenising streaming revenue now live in Brazil, Chiliz will pursue an ambitious long-term vision: combining Real World Assets with Fan Tokens to create a hybrid asset class that bridges utility and equity. Through minority stakes in leading clubs, token holders could gain genuine financial exposure to team success, with revenue shares earmarked for buyback and burn mechanisms – while retaining full utility features. This represents the third stage of Fan Token evolution: from utility-focused engagement (stage one) to performance-linked tokenomics (stage two) to utility combined with real-world asset exposure (stage three).
Together, these three pillars form the foundation of Chiliz’s SportFi vision, the manifesto ends with a detailed execution roadmap for 2026. 
“With Chiliz 2030, we are moving beyond fan engagement alone,” the manifesto concludes. “We are building the financial infrastructure for global sport.”
The full Chiliz 2030 Manifesto is available now : http://www.chiliz.com/vision2030
$CHZ
Read More: https://www.chiliz.com/chiliz-2030-manifesto-sportfi-future/

a decade of explosive hidden industry sabotage
Ripple's transformation into a regulated powerhouse challenges Bitcoin's original narratives of ecosystem purity.
A decade-old email is reviving questions about whether projects like Ripple posed a threat to Bitcoin’s development or merely served as competitors that some BTC backers sought to exclude.
The email, dated July 31, 2014, appears to show Austin Hill, then described as Blockstream’s chief executive, telling the late Jeffrey Epstein and other recipients that “Ripple, and Jed McCaleb’s new Stellar [were] bad for the ecosystem.” Blockstream is a Bitcoin-focused blockchain technology firm.
The correspondence resurfaced after the US Department of Justice published millions of pages of records under the Epstein Files Transparency Act, a disclosure that includes emails, files, images, and videos tied to past investigations.
What was in the email?
The email’s headline draw is obvious (as Jeffrey Epstein is a toxic magnet for attention), and Blockstream’s current leadership has moved quickly to deny any ongoing financial connection.
However, the more durable story is about the sender’s premise rather than the recipients' notoriety.
Austin Hill argued that capital flowing into Ripple and Stellar wasn’t merely competition. It was contamination. He viewed these projects as threats that could “damage” Bitcoin’s future by diluting investor alignment, developer focus, and narrative power.
To many maximalists of that era, the “ecosystem” was not a broad crypto category. It was Bitcoin, plus the infrastructure, that made the flagship digital asset more usable without compromising its ethos.
Thus, this worldview “justified” the specific pressure applied in the email.
However, XRP community members view the email as evidence that early Bitcoin insiders sought to divert capital from Ripple.
For context, XRP commentator Leonidas Hadjiloizou argued the email reads like an attempt to pressure investors to “pick a horse” and to reduce or withdraw a Blockstream allocation if they also backed Ripple or Stellar.
According to him:
“The email to Epstein and Joichi Ito by Austin Hill was just another effort by Bitcoin maxis to fight Ripple and Stellar.”
Meanwhile, the resurfaced email has pulled in modern Ripple voices who lived through these early battles.
Ripple CTO emeritus David Schwartz said he “wouldn’t be at all surprised” if the email is “the tip of a giant iceberg,” arguing that:
“Hill felt that support for Ripple or Stellar made someone an enemy/opponent. It seems quite likely that Hill and others expressed similar views to many other people.”
In his view, standing against the supporters of rival networks as enemies hurts everyone in the space.
However, Schwartz also drew a boundary around what the email does not establish, noting there is no evidence of direct connections between Epstein and Ripple, XRP, or Stellar.
Is Ripple Really Bad for the Ecosystem?
The irony of Hill’s 2014 warning is that the “damage” he feared has arguably materialized, as Ripple has become a dominant force in the industry. In 2026, Ripple has not only survived but also entrenched itself as a regulated pillar of the crypto infrastructure.
However, this growth occurred without the catastrophic consequences for Bitcoin that maximalists originally predicted.
In fact, Ripple’s evolution over the last decade suggests that the “ecosystem” was always destined to be larger than just Bitcoin.
The firm’s most significant milestone came with the conclusion of its long-running battle with the SEC. The 2025 settlement, which saw the company pay a fraction of the regulator’s original demand, effectively cleared the regulatory cloud that had hung over the asset for years.
That legal clarity paved the way for the very thing early Bitcoiners feared: deep institutional integration.
Today, the company looks less like a “scam” and more like a bank with major licenses worldwide.
Moreover, Ripple has aggressively expanded its custody capabilities by acquiring Swiss-based Metaco and Standard Custody & Trust. It has also acquired major financial platforms like GTreasury, Hidden Road, and the stablecoin platform Rail.
Perhaps the strongest rebuttal to the “bad for the ecosystem” claim is the market’s acceptance of XRP as an institutional asset class.
The launch of XRP ETFs in late 2025, including offerings from issuers like Franklin Templeton, signaled that Wall Street no longer views the asset as “contamination.”
Instead, the inflows into these products suggest that for modern investors, the “ecosystem” is not a zero-sum game between Bitcoin and payments networks. It is a diversified portfolio where both “horses” can run.
Will Bitcoin and Ripple community members ever end their bickering?
Long before spot crypto ETFs and big-bank custody deals, the Bitcoin community fought public battles in forums over what counted as “good for the ecosystem.”
On Bitcointalk, one widely circulated 2013 thread framed Ripple as contrary to Bitcoin’s goals and criticized its structure and incentives, reflecting a strain of skepticism that later hardened into the “maximalist” worldview.
Those criticisms tended to cluster around a few themes: governance control, token distribution, whether a project’s economic model was “too company-led,” and whether its outreach to banks and regulators undercut Bitcoin’s political narrative.
However, supporters of Ripple and Stellar argued that faster settlement rails, lower transaction costs, and a focus on payments were practical features rather than ideological betrayals.
They contended that early Bitcoin discourse often conflated “different design” with “existential threat.”
Meanwhile, even if the 2014 email is primarily a time capsule, it maps onto a more recent political and policy conflict that has shifted the Bitcoin-versus-Ripple debate from forums to lobbying.
In early 2025, Jack Mallers, the co-founder and CEO of Twenty One Capital, argued that Ripple was actively lobbying to prevent a Bitcoin-only Strategic Reserve in the US while promoting its centralized, corporate-controlled XRP token.
According to him, XRP’s centralized nature conflicts with the goals of a strategic BTC reserve that are “pro-industry, pro-jobs, and pro-technology.”
That debate became more concrete when President Donald Trump said a US strategic crypto reserve would include XRP alongside Bitcoin and other major tokens.
The announcement sharpened an already familiar fault line: Bitcoin maximalists advocating a single-asset monetary reserve versus a multi-asset framework that benefits large US-linked token networks.
These issues explain why the Bitcoin and Ripple communities appear to be in outright loggerheads over the past years, despite the assets being two of the most popular cryptocurrencies globally.
However, Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse appears to be steering the XRP holders away from the “fights” by consistently urging cooperation and unity among industry players to help the emerging sector grow.

不知道大家还记不记得9月26号只用70分就能领200多u的XPL吗？当时XPL从200领取空投，然后降分，直到降分到70分才领取完毕。按照当时1.5u的价值计算180枚$XPL 价值270u。现在。@Plasma 又来了任务了。#Plasma 华语排行榜任务又来了。当前参加任务人数6900人。排行榜前500名可获取200u以上奖励。当前上榜分数线为115分。国际排行榜上榜分数线98.8。任务积分获得方式最主要为广场发文任务。每天可发一篇短文一篇长文。每篇贴子积分上限为100分。也就是说一天如果能两篇文章都拿到高分就有可能弯道超车。没有参加的也可能尝试一下。这活动收益高。投资少。可以参加。不入榜也没什么损失。只是花点时间。XPL这个活动相比其它几个活动更加优势的是名额有500名。同期另外的活动名额才200人。相对比的话XPL更加容易进入排行榜。另外说明一下华语排行榜与国际排行榜两者是可以同时参加的。但是只能按排行更高的排行榜获得奖励。两者不可都获取奖励的。最后用一小段文字描述一下XPL,Plasma 的叙事扎实而清晰：它以解决稳定币转账的刚性需求为锋利刀刃，以构建数字银行和合规金融场景为价值延伸，并以鼓励长期参与的经济模型凝聚共识。 它是否能够穿越周期，将取决于其生态建设的实际步伐能否坚实迈进。

BitcoinWorld Government Shutdown Crisis Averted as US House Passes Critical Procedural Vote, Paving Way for FY2026 Budget

WASHINGTON, D.C. – In a decisive move to avert a prolonged national crisis, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a critical procedural vote on Tuesday, effectively setting the stage to end the federal government shutdown and advance the Fiscal Year 2026 budget process. This pivotal action, first reported by Walter Bloomberg, signals a potential resolution to the political stalemate that has gripped the capital, with a final vote on the majority of annual spending bills scheduled for later today.

House Procedural Vote Unlocks Path to Resolution

The successful procedural vote, known as a rule vote, functions as the essential key to unlocking the legislative process. Consequently, it allows the House to formally consider and debate the twelve individual appropriations bills that fund the federal government. This vote represents a significant breakthrough following weeks of tense negotiations and partisan deadlock. The rule itself outlines the terms for debate, including time limits and permitted amendments, for the upcoming final votes. Therefore, its passage indicates that leadership from both parties has secured enough support to move forward, preventing a filibuster-like delay in the House’s streamlined procedures.

House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) and Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) reportedly engaged in intense behind-the-scenes discussions over the weekend to secure the necessary consensus. The rule passed with a bipartisan majority, suggesting a fragile coalition has formed to prioritize government operations. “This vote is not the end, but it is the necessary beginning,” stated a senior House aide familiar with the negotiations. “It demonstrates a collective will to govern and meet our basic constitutional responsibility.”

The Mechanics of Ending a Shutdown

Understanding this step requires context on congressional budget mechanics. First, Congress must pass appropriations bills before the start of the fiscal year on October 1st. When it fails, agencies operate under temporary funding measures called Continuing Resolutions (CRs). If those expire without new funding, a shutdown begins. Ending it requires passing full-year bills or another CR. The procedural vote clears the path for the former, a more stable solution. Historically, similar votes have served as reliable indicators of final passage, as members are typically reluctant to support a rule for legislation they plan to ultimately oppose.

FY2026 Budget Moves Toward Finalization

The immediate focus now shifts to the substance of the FY2026 budget. The House plans to hold final votes on eleven of the twelve annual appropriations bills in a marathon session later today. These bills fund everything from defense and homeland security to agriculture and transportation. The single remaining bill, often the most contentious, typically covers Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education. Leadership may be holding that bill for separate, more nuanced negotiation, a common tactic to pass the bulk of funding and reduce overall pressure.

Key provisions in the advancing bills reportedly include:

Defense Spending: A proposed increase aligning with the latest national defense strategy.

Border Security: Funding enhancements for personnel and technology, a major Republican priority.

Infrastructure: Continued investment tied to the bipartisan infrastructure law passed in 2021.

Scientific Research: Stable funding for agencies like the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the National Science Foundation (NSF).

This bifurcated approach—passing eleven bills now—aims to restore functionality to most government agencies immediately. Subsequently, it isolates the most politically sensitive debates, potentially leading to a shorter, more targeted funding lapse for affected departments.

Historical Context and Economic Impact

This shutdown, now in its third week, marks the longest federal funding gap since the 35-day shutdown of 2018-2019. That event cost the U.S. economy an estimated $11 billion, according to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), with billions permanently lost. While each shutdown differs in scope due to varying levels of pre-enacted funding, the cascading effects are consistently severe. Federal employees face furloughs or unpaid work, government services from national parks to passport processing slow or halt, and contractor payments freeze, disrupting private-sector supply chains.

Dr. Maya Chen, an economist at the Brookings Institution, explains the ripple effects. “A shutdown is not a fiscal saving,” she notes. “It simply delays and disrupts economic activity. Essential services degrade, public trust erodes, and the uncertainty dampens business investment. The procedural vote is the first signal to markets and the public that a return to normalcy is imminent.” Indeed, financial markets showed modest relief upon news of the vote’s passage, with futures for key indices ticking upward.

Recent Major Government Shutdowns: Duration and Key Issues Year Duration (Days) Primary Point of Contention 2013 16 Affordable Care Act implementation 2018-2019 35 Border wall funding 2023 0 (Averted) Debt ceiling and spending caps 2025 (Current) 21* FY2026 top-line spending levels and policy riders

*As of the procedural vote passage.

The Human Cost and Path to Reopening

Beyond economics, the human impact is profound. Over 800,000 federal employees have been affected nationwide, with roughly half furloughed and half working without pay. Agencies like the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) have operated with skeleton crews, raising concerns about safety oversight and regulatory functions. The vote initiates a rapid timeline for resolution. Following final House passage, the legislation moves to the Senate, where leadership in both parties has expressed a commitment to swift action. President Biden has indicated he will sign the bills immediately upon their arrival at the White House, triggering the reactivation of shuttered services and guaranteeing back pay for federal workers.

Conclusion

The passage of the procedural vote in the House represents the most concrete step yet toward ending the disruptive 2025 government shutdown and finalizing the FY2026 budget. While final votes remain, this action breaks a debilitating logjam and demonstrates a resumption of core congressional function. The move promises to restore stability for federal employees, reinstate vital public services, and remove a significant cloud of uncertainty from the national economy. The coming hours will determine if this procedural success translates into a complete legislative resolution, finally closing this chapter of political brinkmanship.

FAQs

Q1: What exactly is a procedural vote in the House?A procedural vote, or rule vote, sets the terms for debating and amending legislation on the floor. Its passage is necessary before a final vote on a bill can occur and is often a test of whether the bill has enough support to pass.

Q2: Does this vote mean the shutdown is over?Not immediately. This vote allows the final votes on the spending bills to happen. The shutdown will end once those bills are passed by both the House and Senate and signed into law by the President.

Q3: Why are they voting on only 11 of the 12 appropriations bills?This is a common strategy to pass less controversial funding quickly, isolating the most contentious issues. It allows most of the government to reopen while negotiations continue on the final, typically more complex, bill.

Q4: How soon will federal employees get back pay?Historically, federal employees have received back pay for furlough days as soon as funding is restored, usually in their next scheduled paycheck after the shutdown ends. The law guarantees back pay for both furloughed and excepted employees.

Q5: What happens if the Senate changes the bills the House passes?If the Senate amends the bills, they must go back to the House for concurrence, or both chambers must convene a conference committee to reconcile differences. This could delay final passage, but leadership in both chambers typically coordinates to avoid major changes at this stage.

This post Government Shutdown Crisis Averted as US House Passes Critical Procedural Vote, Paving Way for FY2026 Budget first appeared on BitcoinWorld.

Bitcoin's weekend slide below $76,037 pushed Strategy Inc.'s massive holdings into negative territory for the first time. The firm holds 712,647 unencumbered Bitcoin at an average cost basis that now exceeds current market prices, yet analysts say the company faces no immediate solvency crisis.
CoinDesk reports that Bitcoin's drop to around $75,500 technically puts Michael Saylor's firm underwater on its holdings. The position shift creates challenges for future fundraising rather than triggering balance sheet stress.
Strategy's latest SEC filing shows the firm acquired 855 Bitcoin between January 26 and February 1, 2026, spending $75.3 million at an average price of $87,974. Those purchases now sit at immediate losses as Bitcoin trades below $76,000.
No Collateral Risk Despite $8.2B Convertible Debt Load
The firm's entire Bitcoin position remains unencumbered with none pledged as collateral. This structure eliminates forced liquidation risks even as prices dip below average purchase costs.
You might also like: Bitcoin Dips to $74K Before Recovery as Weekend Liquidity Crunch Sparks $510M Liquidation Wave
Strategy carries $8.2 billion in convertible debt with flexible management options. The company can roll over maturities or convert debt to equity when obligations come due. The first convertible note put date doesn't arrive until Q3 2027, providing breathing room for Bitcoin price recovery.
The SEC filing reveals Strategy increased its dividend rate on Variable Rate Series A Perpetual Stretch Preferred Stock from 11% to 11.25% effective February 1, 2026. The company maintains $2.25 billion in cash reserves designated for dividend payments.
Other Bitcoin treasury firms have recently deployed perpetual preferred shares to retire convertible debt. Strategy maintains similar options if debt management becomes necessary.
Premium Flips to Discount, Slowing Bitcoin Accumulation
The real pressure emerges in Strategy's fundraising capacity. The firm historically funded Bitcoin purchases through at-the-market equity offerings, selling shares at current market prices to minimize impact.
Must read: Bitcoin Faces $300M Liquidation Storm Amid Global Selloff
This approach works when shares trade at premiums to net asset value. Last Friday with Bitcoin near $90,000, Strategy's multiple stood at 1.15x, indicating a premium to holdings. The weekend drop to mid-$70,000 levels flipped that premium into a discount below 1.0x.
New equity raises become less attractive when shares trade at discounts to underlying Bitcoin value. Each share sale would dilute existing shareholders relative to the company's crypto holdings.
Historical precedent shows consequences. During 2022 when Strategy shares traded below Bitcoin holding values for most of the year, the company added only 10,000 Bitcoin to its stack.
Related: South Dakota Revives $1.6B Bitcoin Treasury Plan
The SEC filing shows Strategy sold 673,527 shares of Class A common stock during the reporting period, generating $106.1 million in net proceeds after commissions. The firm maintains $8.06 billion available for future issuance under its ATM program.
Strategy's 712,647 Bitcoin represents approximately 3.4% of the total 21 million supply cap. The concentration has drawn scrutiny from those concerned about network decentralization and the risks of debt-fueled accumulation strategies.
Bitcoin traded around $75,000 during weekend sessions, creating immediate mark-to-market losses on recent acquisitions. The broader crypto market experienced over $510 million in liquidations during the same period.
Strategy maintains a public dashboard at strategy.com providing real-time updates on Bitcoin holdings, financial metrics, and market performance data.
Key Takeaways:
Strategy's 712,647 Bitcoin went underwater as prices fell below $76,037 average purchase cost over weekendAll Bitcoin holdings remain unencumbered with no collateral pledged, eliminating forced liquidation risksStock premium to net asset value flipped to discount, slowing future Bitcoin accumulation through equity sales
#Bitcoin #Strategy #MicroStrategy #MichaelSaylor #CryptoDebt
This Article First Appeared on: https://www.cryptonewslive.org/article/strategys-712k-bitcoin-stack-goes-underwater-at-76k-but-flexible-debt-structure-prevents-forced-selling

XRP is struggling to maintain its footing after a sharp market-wide sell-off that saw the token briefly touch $1.50 before a weak bounce toward $1.61 as of February 3, 2026. While the rebound appears constructive on the surface, on-chain data and capital flow indicators reveal a deeply fragile structure. The recent buying has been almost exclusively driven by short-term speculators the "fast money" while exchange outflows have plummeted by nearly 70%. With long-term conviction holders remaining on the sidelines, XRP remains trapped within a long-term falling channel. Failure to reclaim $1.69 as support could trigger a definitive breakdown, exposing the asset to a potential 27% decline toward $0.93.
The Speculative Trap: Short-Term Traders Take Control
The current price floor is being held by the market's least patient participants, creating a significant risk of a "sell-early" cascade.
HODL Wave Shift: The share of XRP supply held by short-term traders (1-week to 1-month) has surged from 1.99% to 5.27% in just 48 hours.The Exit Risk: This specific group historically sells at the first sign of uncertainty. On January 5, this same cohort offloaded their holdings after a peak at $2.35, contributing to the subsequent decline toward $1.65. Their dominance now suggests that support is built on temporary speculation rather than institutional or long-term accumulation.
Demand Depletion: 70% Collapse in Exchange Outflows
A critical indicator of "dip-buying" health has turned sharply bearish, suggesting broader market participants are avoiding current levels.
The Drop: On January 31, exchange outflows stood at 31.38 million XRP. By early February, they had cratered to just 9.81 million XRP.Weak Absorption: Instead of accelerating during the price dip, buying pressure weakened. This lack of capital leaving exchanges indicates that the speculative bounce lacks the depth required to absorb a potential second wave of selling, leaving the price "pinned" against resistance.
The Breakdown Path: $1.69 vs. The $0.93 Abyss
XRP is currently wedged between a weak recovery trigger and a deep structural floor.
Resistance Hurdles: The first line of defense for bulls is $1.69. Reclaiming this level would stabilize confidence, while a move above $1.96 would be necessary to challenge the long-term falling channel.Support Breakdown: The vital support zone sits between $1.47 and $1.50. If this floor fails to hold, the downside opens toward $1.25. Confirmation of a full channel breakdown could see XRP plummet to $0.93, a level not seen in months, as speculative holders exit their positions in a panic.
Essential Financial Disclaimer
This analysis is for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, or legal advice. Technical analysis and price targets for XRP, including the $0.93 bearish target, are based on market data as of February 3, 2026. Metrics like HODL Waves and exchange outflows are probabilistic and do not guarantee future performance. XRP remains a high-risk asset subject to extreme volatility; the current speculative-led bounce is highly susceptible to reversals. Broad market conditions and macro events can override individual asset technicals. Always conduct your own exhaustive research (DYOR) and consult with a licensed financial professional before making significant investment decisions.

Will the short-term speculators hold the $1.50 line, or is the $0.93 retest inevitable?