Pinned Tweet
Arthur Hayes claims $HYPE is the most dangerous consensus trade in crypto right now.
"I think your consensus trade is not that you lose money per se on Hyperliquid. It's that you severely underperform other assets because you're investing in the thing that everybody knew was going to be successful. I don't think that the risk-return is there for a new unit of fiat to invest in Hyperliquid when you could do ETH, Zcash, or some other narrative in crypto."
"Now, Hyperliquid, good on them. Jeff crushed it. They proved the market's there. They got the trading volume. Now they're competing with centralized exchanges, they're competing with TradFi exchanges, and they're competing with other DEXes. They all offer the same product. They all charge the same amount of money, and so now you have a perfectly competitive market."
"It's hard to sell a perfectly competitive product. That's really, really hard as a business. Great on them for doing it. I'll benefit as a consumer, but I don't want to be an investor."
Greeny and Craig discuss the pressure that social trading brings.
"It's different now. And I must admit the pressure... fomo is great, but one of the things that I personally found tough was people pocket watching you, wallet watching you. If I sell a position, people are like, 'Are you bearish?' I'm like, 'What the hell?'" - Craig
"I'm allowed to take profit. I'm allowed to de-risk a position." - Greeny
"There are many ways to trade. But shucks, man. My advice is to take profit, guys. No one's your friend in trading, I promise you. No one's your friend." - Craig
GGC hosts reveal a trader turned $5 into $500 with a 100x in the Road to London qualifier.
"Wait, someone hit a hundred X? No way!”
“Wow. Made $500. He genuinely put five bucks in."
"Oh, he's not disqualified. Okay. Cool. So a 100x has been hit.”
"Who's this guy? Roxo?”
“I don't know. But he did good. W to him.”
Greeny claims the only people winning in the trenches are the devs and ppl calling out microcaps.
"I decided to put some risk on over the weekend, and I'm down $1.1 K over the weekend. So I made money on Cate, lost money on AI, lost money on Nearcat, lost money on Zcat. So horrible time in the trenches. Bro."
"The only people winning right now are the people calling out low cap shitters and getting paid for it, because they don't have to take the trades themselves."
"I'm down 50%. I had made 60 grand on September 13th, and within five weeks, I'm only up 29 grand. So I've thrown away 30 grand in five weeks onchain."
Arthur Hayes says tokenization won’t cause a supercycle. Money printing driven by war, bailing out AI, and demographics will.
"I'm not entirely sure that tokenization, as these centralized TradFi institutions talk about it, is going to cause a supercycle. I think it's a player that benefits from the supercycle, which is a lot of money is going to be created in the next few years. I think that's because of war and bailing out AI and then demographics."
"Why does a TradFi institution want to do tokenization? Because I believe they can fire their entire back-end middle office."
"That's billions and billions of dollars of costs that you can eliminate as a financial institution. That's why they love tokenization. Who cares if they trade the stock 24/7? It's going to be free or close to free anyways. I wouldn't be excited about it for that. I'd be excited about it because, great, I get to fire all these people."
Paul says if Instagram had no discovery, no one would use it, and that’s exactly how consumer investing platforms work today.
“The true question is how investing goes mainstream. What if Instagram had no discovery? All there is is the search bar. You need to know exactly who and what to search for. This is a terrible experience, and no one would ever go on Instagram again.”
“For consumer investing platforms, this is very easy to imagine. It’s the current state of affairs. The best you get is you go onto a brokerage and see a list of assets, prices, and market caps. There is literally no discovery mechanism. That’s why most of the world is not investing in assets, and why investing platforms have not broken into pop culture.”
“Finance has always been very social. You have WallStreetBets and r/stocks on Reddit, people doing new generational content about personal wealth building on TikTok, and people talking about different cashtags on X. This fragmentation has been the issue because there has never been a platform where you can transparently get information in real time and actualize on it.”
Tig retweeted
Nic Carter claims Michael Saylor is downplaying $BTC quantum risk to avoid spooking $MSTR investors.
"I think what Saylor is doing is trying not to spook the MicroStrategy investors because this truly is a very thorny issue for Bitcoin. Firstly, on the technical front, it's going to be quite challenging to implement post-quantum signatures and to make the transition."
"As an investor in Bitcoin or in MicroStrategy, you're thinking to yourself, wow, this is a little scary. Maybe I won't invest in it. Maybe I'll reduce my portfolio allocation from 5% to 1%, because there is a tail risk here that I can't price."
"Do I think this is the best strategy? No. I want to bite the bullet and fully accept the risk today and start to plan for the future. That's what I want to do. But also, I don't run a company that has X many billion dollars in Bitcoin. So his incentives are different."
Tig retweeted
Arthur Hayes claims $HYPE is the most dangerous consensus trade in crypto right now.
"I think your consensus trade is not that you lose money per se on Hyperliquid. It's that you severely underperform other assets because you're investing in the thing that everybody knew was going to be successful. I don't think that the risk-return is there for a new unit of fiat to invest in Hyperliquid when you could do ETH, Zcash, or some other narrative in crypto."
"Now, Hyperliquid, good on them. Jeff crushed it. They proved the market's there. They got the trading volume. Now they're competing with centralized exchanges, they're competing with TradFi exchanges, and they're competing with other DEXes. They all offer the same product. They all charge the same amount of money, and so now you have a perfectly competitive market."
"It's hard to sell a perfectly competitive product. That's really, really hard as a business. Great on them for doing it. I'll benefit as a consumer, but I don't want to be an investor."
Doug Funnie says he's bullish on $PUMP because onchain lotteries will never die.
"Onchain will exist forever. Will it exist as a place where you can take big swings and stuff can hit escape velocity? Or will it be a strictly hallway of mirrors, slot machines, and scratch-off lottery tickets, which is like the pumpfun 20k topper?."
"Look at Lottery tickets. They're horrifically minus EV. You're programmed to lose, but there's info asymmetry, and hope springs eternal, and people are just going to keep feeding dollar bills into those machines, and that revenue and that version of onchain will be around forever."
"If new token designs like we're seeing on Robinhood Chain and Stonk can create a renaissance of longer hold times, I'm hopeful, and that's what I've seen in the data so far, but that's what's in question here."
Arthur Hayes says there's a 75% chance OpenAI and Anthropic will need a government bailout, so he's long $BTC.
"I bet that they will get bailed out because the entire global economy, whether it's the United States that's building the data centers or places in North Asia and Southeast Asia that are supplying the hardware and the chips to America to build data centers and the raw materials, everybody's in on the same trade."
"The people are going, 'I could have had free healthcare, free university, better water, better food. Yet we decided to blow 2 trillion, 3 trillion dollars on steel and cement.'"
"If I had to put a probability on it, I'd say it's probably 75 percent that these companies will not be able to afford the compute commitments without a government bailout, because the demand will not catch up and pay the price necessary for these companies to have positive unit economics and sufficient scale to honor the contract they signed."
Nic Carter claims Michael Saylor is downplaying $BTC quantum risk to avoid spooking $MSTR investors.
"I think what Saylor is doing is trying not to spook the MicroStrategy investors because this truly is a very thorny issue for Bitcoin. Firstly, on the technical front, it's going to be quite challenging to implement post-quantum signatures and to make the transition."
"As an investor in Bitcoin or in MicroStrategy, you're thinking to yourself, wow, this is a little scary. Maybe I won't invest in it. Maybe I'll reduce my portfolio allocation from 5% to 1%, because there is a tail risk here that I can't price."
"Do I think this is the best strategy? No. I want to bite the bullet and fully accept the risk today and start to plan for the future. That's what I want to do. But also, I don't run a company that has X many billion dollars in Bitcoin. So his incentives are different."