What Drake’s Bitcoin bet loss means for the crypto sector
While Drake – real name Aubrey Drake Graham – might be best-known for his musical talent and his ability to release chart-topping hits, he has also been gaining a reputation for a few other activities, too.
Many may have seen a trend in which he was pictured with various sports stars, wearing a team’s jersey, or publicly voicing his support for them before an event, but they would subsequently go on to lose that said particular event.
However, many more may know Drake’s passion for gambling and using a live casino platform as he continues to place incredible sums of money on the wagers that he makes regarding sporting events and when playing other forms of games. In recent times, he has combined his love for wagering with cryptocurrency, as he places bets using Bitcoin.
Unfortunately, it does not appear as though he is enjoying much luck while making these vast bets; almost $1 million in Bitcoin has been wagered on one operator alone. In May 2022, the rapper lost $234,000 worth of Bitcoin after placing a bet on Charles Leclerc to win the Spanish Grand Prix. As recently as February 2023, he also lost $400,000 in Bitcoin after betting on Jake Paul to beat Tommy Fury inside the boxing ring.
He has not had lots of misfortune with crypto wagering, though, as he has managed to achieve wins, too. He won a value of $512,000 in Bitcoin when wagering on the Kansas City Chiefs to win Super Bowl LVII when they defeated the Philadelphia Eagles.
But what does this mean for the crypto sector?
A Positive Impact on the Crypto Sector
Overall, Drake’s losses do not necessarily mean bad news for the crypto sector. In fact, it could be argued that his continued use of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies to place bets could help to raise awareness of the importance of digital assets and encourage more people to invest in them.
Cryptocurrency still remains an area that is not fully understood by everyone, and it could take a figure such as Drake to show people what the potential benefits of using cryptocurrency for wagering and other activities could be. It could help bring the industry to the forefront of people’s minds, thus encouraging it to grow further.
It is also important to remember that Drake is an incredibly wealthy individual, who can afford to make such vast bets as he has done. Therefore, his losses should not necessarily be seen as a deterrent for people to begin investing in cryptocurrency, but instead, show the importance of being responsible when doing so and understanding that betting – both with fiat currency and cryptocurrencies – can result in you losing your stake.
Are There Any Negatives to Drake’s Crypto Betting on The Sector?
The only real negative that Drake’s crypto betting could have on the sector is if his losses become too great and he decides to sell off a large chunk of his portfolio, which could cause the value of cryptocurrency to dip slightly. However, this is highly unlikely as it can be assumed that he has diversified his investments across different digital assets and markets.
Therefore, overall, it can be said that Drake’s crypto betting is not a negative for the sector, but instead could have a positive impact by raising awareness and encouraging more people to begin investing in digital assets.
|Disclaimer: The information provided in this article is for informational purposes only. Coinpedia makes no representations as to the accuracy or completeness of any information in the article or found by following any link within the article. Readers should do their own research before taking any actions related to the company.|
Bitcoin Price To Trade Flat for the Next Few Weeks, Traders Continue to Sell at a Loss!
Bitcoin Establishing Point of Control Below $17,000
Bitcoin is constantly trading below $17,000 for a very long time as the volatility remains at its lowest, making the market participants furious and debating on the possible breakout zone and period that it may occur.
After being unable to surpass and hold above $16,900, star crypto has found a new support level at $16,800 and has strengthened it to a large extent. Ever since the FTX saga, the BTC price is respecting the resistance zone and hence assumed to establish a ‘Point of Control’ at $17,000.
As per a well-known analyst, Trend Rider, the 100-week point of control (POC) has been framed at $16,800 where-in a huge volume is generated during a specific period. The longer the volume, the stronger could be the PoC resistance or support levels.
“ New bottom forming
~$16.8K is the new 100 Weekly POC for Bitcoin
In simple terms on the last 100 weeks this is the level where most volume has been traded, which is creating a potential bottom formation.
Will let you know how it evolves,”
Short-Term Traders Playout While Long-term Holders Sell at Loss
As the Bitcoin prices trade within squeezed regions, on-chain indicators show that the short-term bitcoin holders are extracting small profits, while the long-term holders continue to incur huge losses. It is quite evident in the Short-Term Holder Spent Output Profit Ratio (STH-SOPR) and Long Term Holder Spent Output Profit Ratio (LTH-SOPR).
The STH-SOPR compares the price sold with the price paid for Bitcoin in the past 155 days or nearly 5 months. The above chart indicates that the star crypto is sold at par with the average levels. If the levels drop, then it indicates the accomplishment of trade at loss. However, it is worth noting that the traders have not been in profit mush before the market collapsed in May 2022 due to Terra’s collapse.
Besides, the LTH-SOPR has dropped heavily below the average levels, indicating the long-term holders to be at a deep loss. The SOPR levels have been bearish ever since the beginning of 2022, marking the year to be a strong bear market.
Collectively, Bitcoin appears to be at a toss as the market participants are eagerly waiting for some volatility, regardless of the direction of the rally. Hence, the more the star crypto remains aloof from massive price actions, the less the traders may be interested to follow the BTC price rally ahead.
Ripple’s Case Will Not Weaken Because Of LBRY’s Loss To The SEC, Claims U.S Attorney
When debating whether or not XRP, the seventh biggest cryptocurrency in the world, is a security, both Ripple and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission accused the other side of overreaching. In documents submitted on Dec. 9, both parties asked the U.S. District Judge Analisa Torres to decide in their favor without scheduling a trial.
The case is getting closer to a decision that might further define whether digital assets are regarded as securities in the U.S., thanks to the final batch of briefs requesting summary judgment. The judge may decide to limit the topics that are shown to the jury or grant either side a victory without a trial.
Another Crypto Project Lost Their Case Against SEC Recently
The legal team behind the LBRY decentralized content platform recently lost a case to the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), and the business has since announced that it is probably closing down. Since many in the sector fear that Ripple may meet the same fate, this setback has set nerves on edge.
In March 2021, the SEC filed a lawsuit against LBRY Inc. over its LBRY Credit (LBC) tokens, claiming that the company had been marketing unregistered securities since 2016. On Nov. 7, last month, a judge declared the tokens to be securities, dealing a devastating blow to the industry. The SEC ultimately prevailed in that dispute.
Following the LBRY Defeat to SEC, US attorney John Deaton gave his opinion on whether it will affect Ripple’s case or not. In the event that LBRY lost, he said that he anticipated two things would occur.
Either the SEC would expedite the verdict to Judge Torres as if the Supreme Court had already ruled, or people would emerge from the shadows and assert that Ripple and XRP will suffer a similar fate.
In his opinion, the LBRY loss to the SEC won’t harm Ripple’s position. He claims that while the LBRY case is not in the 2nd Circuit, the Ripple case is. Additionally, Ripple and XRP holders, who were granted Amicus by the Judge more than a year before any other Amici joined, vehemently contested the common enterprise prong of Howey. LBRY did not contest the common enterprise factor.
What is the Howey Test Prong?
An investment must pass the Howey test in order for the SEC to classify it as a security and regulate it accordingly. In order to prevent investors from simply throwing away money without comprehending the risks, or the problems that may occur, this classification is governed by a number of rules.
In his pretty lengthy Twitter thread, attorney John E. Deaton clarified whether Ripple officials were careless enough to fail to recognize that XRP constituted security. The discussion began in reaction to a tweet from another lawyer, Sasha Hodder.
If the Ripple executives lose their legal battle with the SEC, Hodder revealed that Chris Larsen and Brad Garlinghouse will each be responsible for paying the SEC $450 Million and $150 Million respectively.
Deaton introduced a certain data offer making his assertions regarding the SEC case and stating that the SEC enforcement attorneys were permitted to possess and trade XRP until March 2019.
He continued by stating that in 2014, the USGAO (Government Accountability Office) defined XRP as a virtual currency used in the Ripple decentralized payment system. He also mentioned that XRP, along with BTC and some other tokens were mentioned in the FSOC Annual report for 2019 as virtual currencies that were increasing in market size.
With An additional US$2 billion Issued For US$400,000, Who Will Take Responsibility For The Loss Of Users In The GALA Incident?
The turmoil of the abnormal issuance of pGALA by the multi-chain routing protocol pNetwork is not yet over. Huobi created controversy in the community because it changed the GALA token of some users identified as arbitrage “wool party” to pGALA. Just who is right and who is wrong in this matter?
The turmoil of the abnormal issuance of pGALA by the multi-chain routing protocol pNetwork is not yet over. Huobi created controversy in the virtual assets community because it changed the GALA of some users identified as arbitrage “wool party” to pGALA. Just who is right and who is wrong in this matter?
Event review: pGALA issued more days, Huobi did not close the redemption and withdrawal in time
At 4:00 on November 4th, the virtual assets community began to spread news that the chain game platform Gala Games token Gala (BNB chain) had dropped rapidly and sharply. Originating from the multi-chain routing protocol pNetwork, more than US$1 billion worth of pGALA tokens were minted out of thin air on the BNB chain, and sold on PancakeSwap. This caused the Gala tokens on the BNB chain to drop directly from US$0.04 to US$0.0000045.
Subsequently, community users discovered that there was a huge price difference between the Gala token on the BNB chain and the centralized exchange, and they poured in a large amount of funds to buy the Gala token on the BNB chain to recharge and sell it on the centralized exchange. At that time, Binance and other exchanges had suspended the Gala recharge on the BNB chain, and the Huobi recharge channel was still open. The user completed the arbitrage by moving bricks through Huobi, causing the Gala on the Huobi exchange to drop sharply, from US$0.04 to US$0.0003.
pNetwork tweeted at 4:28 on November 4th that the minting of pGALA tokens exceeding US$1 billion out of thin air was caused by a misconfiguration of the cross-chain bridge. It said the pGALA contract on the BNB chain needed to be re-deployed, and it was working with the Gala Games team and PancakeSwap to obtain the account balance of pGALA users, and restore the deposit and withdrawal function. After the new contract was deployed, new pGALA tokens would be airdropped at a ratio of 1:1.
Based on what the security team SlowMist observed, pGala contract hackers had converted most of the Gala into 13,000 BNB, making a profit of more than US$4.3 million. At that time, the address still had 45 billion Gala, but it was not encashed because the fund pool was basically depleted.
From 9:00 on November 4th, Huobi released five consecutive announcements on the progress of handling abnormal events on the Gala token chain. The announcement stated that Gala tokens would be delisted, and the time node of the accident will be determined as the dividing line. After the incident, the purchase operation will be executed for users, the platform will rename the purchased Gala assets to PGALA (PGALA has nothing to do with the original Gala token, it belongs to a meme token). For those who held Gala tokens before the incident, the Gala project party agreed to make full compensation in the form of a 1:1 proportional airdrop of Gala on the Ethereum chain. At the same time, it said that it will continue to negotiate with related projects on behalf of users to compensate users for asset losses caused by the incident.
At 12:00 on November 5th, Huobi said it would re-list Gala and pGala tokens. For the pGala token, Huobi had set up a tax and fee burning mechanism, adjusted the PGALA spot transaction fee to 1.2% in both directions, and used all the fee income to repurchase and destroy pGala tokens.
According to pNetwork’s official Twitter channel, no information was released to the community for two days, apart from an announcement disclosing the existing problems when the incident happened. Faced with constant questions from the community, pNetwork did not release the post-event analysis of the pGala incident until 2:00 on November 6th.
According to the analysis report, at 1:52 on November 4th, the team noticed a configuration error in GALA’s pNetwork cross-chain bridge. Due to a misconfiguration, the ownership of the pGALA smart contract deployed on the BSC had been secretly taken over. The fund pool stood at US$400,000. At that time, the attacker who obtained the ownership of the smart contract did not launch any attacks.
At 3:11 on November 4th, pNetwork contacted GalaGames to suspend the cross-chain bridge activities, and drained the pGALA/BNB PancakeSwap pool through the white hat operation. This was an attempt to keep BNB funds in the pool, so that after the situation was under control, the funds could be returned to all its liquidity providers.
At 4:13 on November 4th, pNetwork issued an additional 27,814,200,000 unsecured pGALA to drain the pGALA/BNB PancakeSwap pool. Subsequently, an additional 27,814,200,000 unsecured pGALA tokens were issued.
As mentioned above, at 4:28 on November 4th, GalaGames and pNetwork tweeted to indicate the problem, reminding community users not to buy Gala tokens on the BNB chain. After the dissuasion was ineffective, at 4:29 on November 4th, pNetwork chose to continue draining the pool in order to protect users pouring into the added fund pool from potential attackers. At 6:16 on November 4th, GalaGames and pNetwork chose to stop draining the flow pool. So far, pNetwork has recovered 12977BNB in the draining pool behavior. At 7:03 on November 4th, Huobi shut down the Gala recharge function on the BNB chain.
According to the analysis report disclosed by pNetwork, the pGala contract hacker mentioned above without the knowledge of SlowMist was the official pNetwork. pNetwork’s additional issuance of worthless pGala tokens was due to a misconfiguration of GALA’s pNetwork cross-chain bridge, which caused a risk exposure of US$400,000.
Haotian, a blockchain security practitioner, tweeted that the pNetwork project team lacked common sense with regard to DeFi security, and injected excess liquidity into the ecosystem without completely eliminating potential hazards, which was too hasty and irresponsible. Afterwards, the possibility of potential insider operations was not accounted for. Instead, it mediated between Huobi and GALA to shirk responsibility and assign blame. It is understandable and not an exaggeration to say that it was the instigator.
The Gala project party, as the directly related party between pNetwork and the centralized exchange, failed to convey the information accurately (the GALA team confirmed that Binance closed the deposit and withdrawal of GALA on the BNB chain, but did not confirm the closure of the deposit and withdrawal with the docking team of Huobi Global). pNetwork’s conduct is extremely harmful to users, which shows that the Gala team does not take token holders seriously.
At the same time, users began to move bricks for arbitrage until Huobi shut down the Gala recharge on the BNB chain for up to 3 hours, which showed that the security and risk management measures of the Huobi platform are insufficient.
pNetwork and Huobi to go to court, Huobi promises to pay users $6 million
The latest pGala additional issuance incident affected the community in various ways. Some users profited handsomely via arbitrage, while others suffered losses. According to data on Lookonchain, a Smart Money address purchased 406 million GALA from the PancakeSwap pool for US$120,380 20 minutes after the GALA attack, and earned US$5.79 million and US$675,000 from Huobi and Binance respectively. The question then arises as to who victims can turn to in the case of financial losses.
Addressing this issue, Huobi issued a statement on the evening of November 6th, 2022. In the statement, Huobi stated that pNetwork’s behavior was not the purported white hat operation it claimed to be, but a malicious hacker attack conducted for profit.
Firstly, Huobi stated that while pNetwork did use its own single-line contact channel to communicate with the exchange, but the message did not indicate that pNetwork was preparing to attack vulnerabilities, let alone that pNetwork would issue a large amount of 55.6 billion GALA tokens into the market within a space of 50 minutes. This action resulted in serious consequences, as innocent users and exchanges suffered heavy losses.
According to analysis from Slowmist, the misconfiguration of the cross-chain bridge mentioned by pNetwork above was actually carried out by the owner of the private key with administrative rights for the pGALA proxy contract that had been leaked on Github, and this owner address had been maliciously replaced 70 days ago, resulting in the pGALA contract being vulnerable and at risk of being attacked. pNetwork had deliberately concealed this fact from Huobi.
In addition, according to the post-event analysis report released by pNetwork, the community had been publicly reminded not to buy Gala tokens on the BNB chain. Specifically, the pNetwork team had requested that users not move tokens for arbitrage upon observing the large price differences between the chain and the exchanges.
Had opportunistic investors ignored pNetwork’s reminder and seized the change to arbitrage and profit handsomely? Had the pNetwork team been an individual investor, would they have let the arbitrage opportunity pass?
Secondly, Huobi believes that there is no evidence that anyone would exploit the vulnerability in pNetwork to launch an attack, and it was pNetwork itself THAT was eager to exploit this vulnerability for profit. The vulnerability has existed for 67 days, which was a sufficient amount of time to evaluate potential security solutions, but the pNetwork team had eagerly chosen to actively exploit the vulnerability within 50 minutes and issue 55.6 billion tokens to drain the liquidity pool.
The pNetwork team may have been eager to solve the problem, but because there had been no attacks since the vulnerability had been discovered 67 days ago, the team could have calmly come up with a more comprehensive solution instead of one that put the market at risk.
Moreover, Gala on the BNB chain was originally a token for pledge mapping. According to past experience, the team can completely replace the token contract and discard the token contract with risks. Should pNetwork’s have been transparent about its intentions, the community would have been able to understand and emphatize. There was no need to solve the problem by draining the assets in the liquidity pool through additional issuance – an action that is extremely risky and harmful to the market.
Thirdly, Huobi believes that pNetwork’s argument that the additional issuance of up to 55.6 billion Tokens was to arbitrate a liquidity pool worth about US$400,000 that was at risk of being attacked is groundless. Huobi believes that pNetwork’s intention was to profit from market turbulence, that pNetwork was using the “white hat attack” as a guise to carry out hacking attacks to avoid legal sanctions.
Furthermore, pNetwork’s official analysis report disclosed that the 12,977 BNB (worth about US$4.5 million) in assets recovered by the pool would be returned to the unincorporated Holders who had pledge dpGALA, in a snapshot that was taken at 16:00 on November 7th, 2022. Such actions do not seem to correspond to claims that it had been a white hat attack.
However, pNetwork mentioned in its post-event analysis report that a total of 55.6 billion Gala tokens had been issued twice. According to the GALA price of US$0.04 at that point in time, 55.6 billion Gala tokens were worth to US$2.2 billion. pNetwork’s had issued additional Gala tokens worth US$2.2 billion for a liquidity pool with a potential risk of US$400,000. It would be difficult for the community to comprehend the logic behind such a course of action. Moreover, the method of privately issuing additional tokens is not in line with the spirit of the blockchain.
Regarding Huobi’s statement, pNetwork officially tweeted that it condemned Huobi’s false accusations against pNetwork and would take appropriate legal action to counter Huobi’s claims. pNetwork said that there is evidence to prove that its actions were conducted in good faith, and all actions had been agreed upon with GalaGames in advance.
In response to pNetwork’s response, Huobi told PANews that pNetwork’s response was false and weak in nature. Huobi countered that pNetwork had exploited the GALA token loophole by issuing a large number of tokens, completely concealed its attack behavior from the exchange, and had only contacted the exchange within the space of an hour. During the attack, 55.6 billion tokens had been issued by exploiting contract loopholes. During this period, the exchange was not given any time to respond, nor did pNetwork confirm with the exchange whether relevant measures had been taken to ensure asset security. Huobi Global has kickstarted legal procedures and intends for pNetwork to bear legal responsibility for its actions.
In addition, on the evening of November 9th, 2022, Justin Sun, a member of the Huobi Global Advisory Committee, said in the TS event “Entry Full Moon, Brother Sun’s Work Report” held by PANews that during the GALA incident, the recovered funds were worth about US$4 million, which had returned on-chain.
US$6 million in funds will be directed toward airdrop compensation to users who have suffered losses, and the remaining funds will be used to repurchase and destroy PGALA tokens. All compensation from pNetwork will be used to toward compensating users who have suffered losses on the platform.
Reflection: Early warning safety mechanisms need to be strengthened
This incident was caused by pNetwork engineers leaving the key in the contract, which compromised security. pNetwork chose to overcome this security risk by issuing additional GALA tokens to drain the liquidity pool. Such a solution was extremely risky, and, due to poor communication, Huobi did not shut down deposits and withdrawals of GALA in time, which caused a large-scale impact.
The pNetwork and Gala projects are majorly responsible for this incident, which led to user losses and an erosion of confidence in the community. pNetwork were clearly aware that this vulnerability had existed for two months and had not been exploited, but did not carefully consider a comprehensive solution. Instead, it chose a high-risk solution that violated the spirit of the blockchain and was likely to cause large-scale damage to users. As an insider, the Gala project party chose to actively enable this high-risk behavior instead of investigating the root cause and providing a viable solution.
However, the security emergency response and risk control systems on the Huobi platform were extremely ineffective. When seeing the price difference on the chain, users in the community would definitely be aware of the arbitrage opportunity. How could Huobi, as a first-tier exchange, not know?
Therefore, although the communication with pNetwork was not effective, Huobi would have had enough time to halt the recharge function in order to reduce the number of affected users.
A user that has suffered losses can only approach pNetwork, the main responsible party that kickstarted the incident, to reach a solution regarding loss reduction. This is a security crisis caused by a loophole in the smart contract, but it is more pertinent than any code loophole, and blockchain project parties should pay attention to it.
As Hao Tian, a blockchain security practitioner, said: Security companies that specialize in early warnings and detections in security incidents were collectively absent from this Gala event. Security audits and services can check for code defects, but it is difficult to fight against the potential “man-made disaster” crisis created by industry ecological participants eager to profit from a quick buck.
Disclaimer: This is a press release post. Coinpedia does not endorse or is responsible for any content, accuracy, quality, advertising, products, or other materials on this page. Readers should do their own research before taking any actions related to the company.
MicroStrategy’s $1.99B Bitcoin Impairment Loss Could Be Avoided If Invested in Ethereum
According to MicroStrategy Inc.’ (NASDAQ: MSTR) third-quarter 2022 financial results, the company is counting an impairment loss of approximately $1.99 billion on its Bitcoin holding. However, a study conducted by blockchaincenter.net has revealed that MicroStrategy’s crypto investment could be worth $ 5.598 billion if Michael Saylor purchased Ethereum.
The business intelligence company is under a heavy spotlight from global investors closely monitoring Bitcoin and digital assets. The company’s commitment to Bitcoin may become its worst enemy as other digital assets gain more traction against the former. Moreover, many digital assets have outperformed Bitcoin in the past two bull markets.
As such, Kelvin O’Leary, aka Mr. Wonderful, has argued that it is best to approach investors with a portfolio mindset.
Nonetheless, Saylor has remained steadfast on Bitcoin support and its prospects. In his defence, Ethereum’s leading developer Vitalik Buterin argued that the earliest projects in an industry are the most ‘genuine’. In that case, Bitcoin is almost six years older than Ethererum, which was launched around 2015.
Should MicroStrategy Diversify its Crypto Holdings Ahead?
MicroStrategy has largely influenced global hedge funds, institutional investors, and retail traders’ approach to digital assets. Furthermore, the company’s market capitalization is largely valued in Bitcoin. According to market data provided by MarketWatch, MicroStrategy has a valuation of approximately $2.81 billion.
However, new data contradicts MicroStrategy’s approach to digital assets investment. According to blockchauncenter.net, MicroStrategy’s crypto investment would be approximately $1.615 billion up if Saylor focused on Ethereum.
From another perspective, MicroStrategy could have earned as much as 239,690 ETH if Saylor purchased and staked Ether back in 2020. Additionally, if MicroStrategy converted its Bitcoin holding to ETH now and staked all, then annual revenue from staking would be $134 million.
The case would further be ballooned should MicroStrategy diversify its crypto portfolio on altcoins, which have outperformed both Bitcoin and Ethereum. Nonetheless, Bitcoin and Ethereum are the most regulated digital assets globally, with the former already used as legal tender in two countries.
Notably, crypto regulations have been deemed as the next hurdle to global mass adoption. Perhaps, Saylor’s laser focus on Bitcoin is due to its deep liquidity, utility value, and future growth prospects. Furthermore, Saylor has indicated that MicroStrategy is a long-term Bitcoin holder.
Meanwhile, MSTR shares are trading down approximately 68 percent in the past year, and another 54% dip YTD.
Was this writing helpful?
Bitcoin Hash Rate Reaches Highs Despite Miners Being in Loss, Is it an Indication of BTC Price Rally?
Bitcoin price continues to hover around $20,000, failing to rise beyond the crucial resistance levels of around $20,800. Amidst the sceptical market conditions, the BTC mining difficulty, measured by the hash rate, is reaching new highs. On the contrary, the miners continue to mine BTC at a loss as the revenue fails to compensate for the cost of production.
Recently, the hash rate, which had dropped more than 50% following the unfamous May 2022 crash, rebounded finely and rose high enough to mark new records.
While the mining difficulty has increased, the miner’s revenue has dropped significantly. The revenue has reached a peak at $74.418 million while BTC price marked its highs at $69,000 back in October 2021. Ever since then, the revenue has dropped & reached a low of $13.92 million, presently standing at $20.49 million.
It is a known fact that the miner’s revenue is halved every 4 years, marking the Bitcoin halving event to curb inflation. Presently, BTC rewards have dropped heavily to an all-time low of 4.06 BTC per Exahash. Hence, the revenue in USD equates to $78,000 to $88,000 per Exahash per day, which has dropped back to the October 2020 levels.
The revenue back in October 2020 dropped, marking the 2020 halving event wherein BTC prices were around $10,000. However, the mining difficulty has increased by nearly 66% since then while the revenue remains the same. Despite this, the miners continued to hold around 78.4K BTC in their treasuries. Therefore, they are signalling the possibility of a remarkable bull rally ahead.
Was this writing helpful?
BTC365 supports transfer season with a 100% Welcome Bonus and 5% Wager Loss Bonus
Jules Kounde rejected Chelsea’s deal and has decided to join FC Barcelona instead. Manchester United is considering letting Cristiano Ronaldo leave amidst the transfer window as he is rumoured to have affected the team’s morale. The Red Devils are interested in signing Frankie de Jong but challenges ahead may stir their attention to Tielemans, who is thought to be more available. Interestingly, Mikel Arteta seems to have set his mind to sign the 25-year-old footballer to Arsenal. The transfer window will bring about drastic changes to the Premier League. With these transfers, the Premier League will be more unpredictable, and the renowned firm BTC365 launches two bonuses to support newcomers and users who suffer losses by making risky wagers.
The summer transfer window could greatly change the balance of power between the clubs. To support users and help them make bold wagers, BTC365 is announcing a new stimulus package. With them, even a newcomer will benefit by wagering on the results of the games of the updated teams.
Neymar is the most expensive football player in the history of the game. He penned a new four-year deal with Paris Saint-Germain last May, but his team was knocked out of the Champions League while Neymar didn’t score a single goal. PSG is now open to selling the star and offers have been sent to Manchester City, Chelsea, and United.
For the second time in his career, Paul Pogba has returned to Juventus on a free transfer. The first time was in 2012. The Old Lady hopes that now the most attacking midfielder will swell his trophy cabinet, in addition to 39 goals and 51 assists in 226 games played for Manchester United.
The World Cup this year will be held in winter, and the Premier League kickstarted in early August. BTC365 gives punters an excellent opportunity to join the new season boldly and even profitably.
A 100% welcome bonus is a promotion exclusively for registered members making their first deposit. Each such deposit will be supplemented by 100% up to 200 USDT / 3 LTC / 0.1 ETH / 6.6 mBTC. Another promotion induces punters to make even risky wagers to support their favorite teams. This is a 5% Sportsbook wager loss bonus: BTC365 will cover up to 5% of the losses at a maximum of 200 USDT / 3 LTC / 0.1 ETH / 6.6 mBTC.With BTC365, the new football season kicks off brightly and profitably for the punters. At BTC365 every punter wins even if he loses! For details please contact the marketing team of BTC365 on Discord.
Disclaimer: This is a press release post. Coinpedia does not endorse or is responsible for any content, accuracy, quality, advertising, products, or other materials on this page. Readers should do their own research before taking any actions related to the company.
Was this writing helpful?
Bitcoin Address in Loss Smash ATH, Has the Bearish September Just Began?
Bitcoin price was on the verge to close the monthly trade on a bearish note, however, the asset surged marginally above $20,000. Woefully, the asset is constantly hovering around $20,000, maintaining a constant descending trend. While the asset is believed to be under bearish captivity for a long, a notable upswing may be fast approaching.
As seen in the above chart, the BTC price is trading within a huge falling wedge and has approached the peak of the consolidation. Hence, the asset appears to be due for a notable breakout which may uplift the price close to $22,000 in the coming days. Moreover, the parallel consolidation in the recent past substantiates the claim.
Presently, the Bitcoin price is holding the lower boundaries at $19,900 firmly and if it further breaks $20,600, the bearish continuation may conclude. Else, a sweep of $19,500 may be imminent.
Bitcoin Address in Loss Smash the ATH
Regardless of the upcoming price action, the number of Bitcoin addresses in loss has reached an ATH of more than 17,500K.
The total address in loss had bottomed and reached levels below 2500K at the beginning of 2022. However, the number of addresses spiked, which further intensified to hit the current levels at 18,965K surpassing the previous ones observed in the first few days of July.
Conversely, the number of addresses in profits has also bottomed hard and reached a month low of 23,760K. On the brighter side, the addresses holding 1+ coins just went above 900,000.
While the Bitcoin(BTC) price is swinging within an uncertain environment, the addresses in loss are adding up every new day. Therefore, if the star crypto fails to rebound, then more addresses may be in loss which may further impact the price rally.