Odaily Editorial Team Tea Talk (June 17)

Odaily星球日报Published on 2026-06-17Last updated on 2026-06-17

Abstract

Odaily Editorial Team Casual Chat (June 17) This is an informal column sharing real-time thoughts from Odaily's editorial team on industry news, data, and events. The content is based on actual investment and observations, does not constitute investment advice, and aims to expand perspectives. Azuma shared recent operations: small-scale buys in crypto (mainly BTC) at relatively high levels, a small addition to HOOD stock, and participation in World Cup prediction markets. He also discussed Hyperliquid, noting that while its token HYPE has performed well, its high price may hinder the expansion of its HIP-3 ecosystem by making market creation cost-prohibitive, potentially limiting the platform to just one major market (trade.xyz). Suzz emphasized the importance of a calm mindset in investing, stating that markets offer perpetual opportunities. He warned against "hindsight bias," where past opportunities seem obvious, and stressed that the present always holds new chances for those with the right knowledge and temperament. Golem analyzed SpaceX's acquisition of AI tool Cursor's parent company, Anysphere, for $60 billion paid entirely in SpaceX stock. He speculated whether Musk's interests might work to keep SpaceX's trading volume and market cap high in the short term to reduce the actual equity cost of the deal, noting current high retail investor enthusiasm. Wenser shared a market outlook: cautiously bullish on BTC, monitoring SpaceX stock post-IPO for a potential rise, ...

This is an 'informal' column from within the Odaily editorial department. Here, the author shares immediate thoughts and different perspectives on industry news, data, hot events, and their peripheral details; expands upon investment ideas and opportunity hypotheses still under verification—they are not necessarily direct wealth passwords, they could just be questions themselves; shares observations gained from communicating with industry practitioners; and shares materials that have genuinely enhanced our understanding, whether internal or external.

This column's content is based on the real investment and observation experiences of Odaily editorial team members. It does not accept any form of commercial advertising, nor does it constitute investment advice (after all, we are equally experienced in losing money). Its purpose is solely to broaden perspectives and supplement sources of information, not to manufacture consensus. Welcome to join the Odaily community (Telegram discussion group, X official account) to exchange ideas, raise doubts, and banter together.

Azuma(@azuma_eth)

Introduction: Novice, learning more.

Sharing: 1. Recent trading has been slightly more frequent than before. In Crypto, took the opportunity during the recent dip to make some small-scale buys (mainly BTC), but the entry points were generally high (6.2-6.6k), so there's basically no profit; In US stocks, added a small amount to HOOD, the logic was explained in an article a couple of days ago; Also, playing the World Cup on prediction markets, simultaneously doing small-scale, high-frequency copy trading (testing a new tool, feeling good for now, will recommend after a few more days) + large-scale, low-frequency active orders.

2. HYPE has performed well recently, but I increasingly feel that 'the more expensive HYPE becomes, the more detrimental it is to Hyperliquid'. The reason is that Hyperliquid's most imaginative narrative was building a multi-asset trading ecosystem around HIP-3. However, now trade.xyz dominates the HIP-3 project, while Felix, Ventuals have shut down one after another... The excessively high HYPE price has in fact become an obstacle to the expansion of the HIP-3 blueprint (building a custom market based on HIP-3 has a 500k HYPE staking requirement, which translates to over $35 million at the current price). The market's previous vision was 'Hyperliquid + countless custom markets', but the current situation is 'Hyperliquid + trade.xyz'. If the upper-layer market solidifies with only trade.xyz, it obviously doesn't align with the market's previous expectations in terms of user reach and imaginative prospects.

Suzz (@aidongshoupai)

Introduction: Just sold SK Hynix too early.

Sharing: The market is never short of opportunities, but it is always scarce in calm capital and mindset. The capital market is perpetually flowing; market trends won't end just because you miss one opportunity. The short-term moonshot you missed today, the hot sector you missed, the bottom-fishing opportunity you missed, are all just minuscule among the countless opportunities in the market. The market operates day after day, with old and new themes alternating, and boom-bust cycles repeating. Missing this bus, the next opportunity will arrive soon. Investing doesn't require catching every single market move; we only need to grasp opportunities within our cognitive scope and with controllable risks. Obsessing over missed opportunities and being trapped by anxiety is the biggest pitfall in investing. Instead of internalizing FOMO (fear of missing out), it's better to settle down, improve your cognition, and wait for the next timing that belongs to you.

Additionally, reviewing past trading history, I discovered a very interesting phenomenon: When we look back from a post-hoc perspective, we can easily find that there were excellent opportunities everywhere. Looking back at the market from last year, last month, even a few weeks ago, we can always clearly see which assets were at lows, which sectors were about to explode, which trends deserved heavy positions, as if there were easily attainable profit opportunities everywhere.

But this falls into 'hindsight bias', always seeing the market clearly in retrospect, yet feeling lost in the present. Actually, this phenomenon precisely confirms a core truth: History is full of opportunities, and the present is never short of them either. Past opportunities never disappeared; it's just that our cognitive ability was insufficient, our mindset was浮躁, preventing us from recognizing or daring to seize them. Similarly, the market at this very moment still contains countless investment opportunities at different levels and with varying risk grades.

golem(@web3_golem)

Introduction: Golem's whimsical thoughts.

Sharing: On June 16, SpaceX announced the acquisition of Anysphere, the parent company of AI programming tool Cursor, for $60 billion. This acquisition is essentially a case of mutual need. Musk needs Cursor's developer data to train his AI model Grok, while Anysphere needs the massive computing power behind SpaceX to support training its own AI model Composer to compete against its former partner Anthropic's models.

But beyond the strategic significance for both parties, a detail easily overlooked in this acquisition is its impact on SpaceX's stock price, because Musk didn't actually spend a single penny—the funds for acquiring Cursor were entirely paid using SpaceX's Class A common stock.

According to SEC filing documents, SpaceX implemented the merger with Anysphere through its wholly-owned subsidiary X67 Inc. X67 Inc. will merge into Anysphere, with Cursor as the surviving entity becoming a wholly-owned subsidiary of SpaceX. Upon completion of the merger, all common and preferred stock of Anysphere will be converted into SpaceX Class A common stock, with the exchange ratio calculated based on the volume-weighted average price over the 7 consecutive trading days prior to closing.

Clearly, in this acquisition, Musk got the better deal. Paying with SpaceX stock allows Musk to leverage the company's currently extremely high market valuation to complete the acquisition by giving up relatively little equity. Therefore, the actual cost of the acquisition is much lower; most of what was given was bubble...

So, here's the key point: As of June 16 when the merger agreement was signed, only 3 trading days had passed since SpaceX's IPO. Therefore, the earliest stock transfer will occur next week. To acquire Cursor more cheaply and with less equity given up, will the 'Musk interest group' proactively stabilize SpaceX's trading volume and keep its market cap at a high level?

Of course, there's no strong causal relationship between these two, it's just an analytical speculation regarding factors affecting SPCX's stock price.

SPCX's current price is mainly driven by market sentiment. According to Vanda Track's recent data, SpaceX remains the individual stock most favored by retail investor funds in the US, topping the list of net retail inflows for multiple consecutive days. However, retail enthusiasm is bound to wane; 'faith' does have its price. By then, institutions will need to take over as the main force stabilizing the SPCX price.

Wenser(@wenser2010)

Introduction: Tea-serving junior, crypto酱油党 (casual observer), media observer.

Sharing: 1. BTC had a small rebound, US-Iran tensions eased, still bullish for now, will consider testing short positions around 68k-69k;

2. SpaceX IPO concluded, but didn't close above a $2.2 trillion market cap on the first day, angrily lost $10, but looking above $250 after entering the Nasdaq in July;

3. Small-scale testing in World Cup betting ongoing. Many upsets or draws in the first two days of group stage, especially Spain vs Cape Verde 0:0 probably made many jump. Win rates for strong teams have picked up these past two days. Currently看好 France, Argentina, Germany, Norway, can focus on these later.

4. Japanese and Korean stock markets continue to surge higher, the trend of the strong getting stronger remains evident. The next landmark events now are the Fed rate hike or the Anthropic/OpenAI IPO. Personally, I believe Anthropic has the potential to be another historically largest IPO after SpaceX, with market cap potentially rising to the $2-3 trillion scale. Saw a post shared by a group friend these past two days saying 'The AI industry, like the real estate industry, is a capital-intensive industry', which felt very insightful. Therefore,布局 (positioning in) picks-and-shovels plays for defensive investment is a good strategy.

Qin Xiaofeng(@QinXiaofeng888)

Introduction: Options enthusiast, Meme bag holder.

Sharing: Regarding operations, bought the dip on HYPE around $56 last week to go long, gradually sold after it reached $70. Selling doesn't mean I'm not bullish, just that I think a major breakthrough is difficult in the short term. However, long-term, the $50~60 range will become an important support zone. Plan to continue buying at this level for two reasons: First, in this wave of traditional asset tokenization trading, Hyperliquid has basically captured the biggest红利 (dividends), with transaction fees持续飙升 (continuously soaring) and HYPE buybacks剧增 (dramatically increasing). The average monthly buyback over the past six months exceeded $60 million. It needs to be clarified that 97-99% of Hyperliquid platform's transaction fee revenue is directly used to repurchase HYPE in the open market. Currently, no other exchange does this, and this is the biggest growth flywheel. The second reason is, since the HYPE现货 ETF (spot ETF)上市 (listed), cumulative net inflows reached $180 million, with日均 (daily average) net inflows of $7.5 million. Traditional capital's favor for HYPE is obvious, a待遇 (treatment) not seen with other crypto ETFs after listing.

Regarding ETH, the market now presents a very bizarre situation. Pure crypto investors are utterly失望透顶 (disappointed) with ETH—because its price performance has been very拉胯 (lacking) over the past few years, leading to lost opportunity cost; traditional investors, especially Wall Street figures represented by Tom Lee, are反而 (instead)持续加码 (continuously increasing positions) in ETH with real money, believing it's an undervalued 'Amazon'. Neither side can convince the other, so let time tell. Personally, I think ETH has really跌到了 (fallen to) '白菜价' (dirt-cheap price). Getting on board now costs less than Bitmine.

Related Questions

QWhat are the main concerns Azuma raises about the high price of HYPE in relation to Hyperliquid's HIP-3 ecosystem?

AAzuma argues that the high price of HYPE is becoming detrimental to Hyperliquid's HIP-3 ecosystem expansion. A core requirement to build a custom market on HIP-3 is staking 500,000 HYPE, which currently costs over $35 million. This prohibitive cost has led to the shutdown of projects like Felix and Ventuals, leaving trade.xyz as the dominant, and potentially sole, player. This concentration contradicts the initial vision of 'Hyperliquid + countless custom markets' and reduces the platform's user reach and future potential.

QAccording to Suzz, what is a major pitfall for investors, and what mindset should they adopt instead?

ASuzz identifies the obsession with missed opportunities and the resulting anxiety as a major trap for investors. He advises against this 'hindsight bias,' where past opportunities seem obvious. Instead, investors should remain calm and understand that the market is perpetual, with new opportunities constantly emerging. The key is to focus on improving one's own cognition and discipline, waiting for opportunities that fall within one's own understanding and risk tolerance, rather than chasing every trend.

QWhat theory does golem propose regarding the impact of SpaceX's stock-for-stock acquisition of Cursor on its share price (SPCX)?

AGolem suggests that 'Musk's interest group' might have an incentive to actively maintain SpaceX's trading volume and market capitalization at high levels before the deal's final share exchange. Since the acquisition was paid entirely with SpaceX A-class common stock, and the exchange ratio is based on the average price from the 7 trading days before closing, a higher stock price allows Musk to acquire Cursor by giving up a smaller percentage of SpaceX equity. Therefore, stabilizing the price could make the acquisition cheaper for SpaceX.

QWhat are the two main reasons cited by Qin Xiaofeng for considering HYPE a long-term buy in the $50-$60 range?

AQin Xiaofeng provides two reasons: 1) Fundamental Growth: Hyperliquid has captured the lion's share of the traditional asset on-chain trading trend, leading to soaring transaction fees. Crucially, 97-99% of the platform's fee revenue is used to buy back HYPE from the open market, creating a powerful growth flywheel. 2) Institutional Demand: Since its ETF listing, the HYPE ETF has seen a net inflow of $180 million, averaging $7.5 million daily. This strong and sustained interest from traditional finance is a unique advantage not seen with other crypto ETFs.

QHow does Wenser describe the current market sentiment divide regarding ETH (Ethereum)?

AWenser describes a stark divide in ETH sentiment. On one side, pure crypto investors are deeply disappointed with ETH due to its poor price performance in recent years, which has led to significant opportunity cost. On the other side, traditional investors, exemplified by figures like Tom Lee from Wall Street, are actively buying ETH, viewing it as an undervalued asset akin to 'Amazon.' Both sides hold firm in their opposing views, leaving the outcome to be determined by time.

Related Reads

Global Stock Market's Storm Center: South Korea's Stock Market De-leveraging Is Largely Complete

Storm's Eye: South Korean Market De-leveraging Nears Completion The recent sharp correction in South Korean equities, with the KOSPI index dropping 32% from its June high, has been a key trigger for global tech stock volatility. The core driver was not a fundamental shift but a forced de-leveraging process within the market's unique structure, which is now largely complete. Two main leverage channels amplified the sell-off: 1. **Leveraged ETFs:** Their size, proportionally four times larger than in the U.S., peaked near $50 billion. Their mandatory daily rebalancing mechanism created a vicious cycle of "price drop → forced selling → further drop." Approximately 75% of this excess has been unwound, shrinking to $26 billion, with regulatory curbs now blocking new inflows. 2. **Hedge Fund Leverage:** Using swaps to magnify exposure, hedge funds saw their net long positioning fall by over 50% from peak levels. The most intense phase of this institutional de-leveraging is over. In contrast, **retail margin debt** poses minimal systemic risk. At 0.5% of market cap, it is far lower than in the U.S. or China, lacks automatic triggers, and is concentrated in smaller stocks. The conclusion: the high-leverage structures most prone to "chain-reaction selling" have been substantially cleared. The market is transitioning from a liquidity-driven crash to one priced more on fundamentals. The article argues that the AI trend—centered on Korean memory chips—remains intact. This episode represents a painful but necessary clearing of crowded trades, not the end of the AI revolution. For investors, the key question is conviction in the long-term AI direction; if the trend is real, current volatility is a cost of entry, not a terminal risk.

链捕手21m ago

Global Stock Market's Storm Center: South Korea's Stock Market De-leveraging Is Largely Complete

链捕手21m ago

The Eternal Fragments of Money: Third-Party Payment Has No First Principle

"The Enduring Fragments of Money: Third-Party Payments Lack a First Principle" Stripe is reportedly attempting to acquire PayPal, marking a significant shift reminiscent of PayPal's merger with the original X.com 30 years ago. The article analyzes Stripe's strategic challenges and the broader payments industry landscape. Despite its initial success with a developer-friendly API model, Stripe missed its optimal IPO window during the pandemic and has since seen its valuation decline. Its attempts to expand through acquisitions and new ventures, particularly in stablecoins (like its OUSD project) and Agent-focused payments (ACP/MPP protocols), have faced headwinds. The author argues that the payment industry remains highly fragmented and is ultimately an adjunct to the traditional banking system. This structure limits the potential for any single player, including Stripe, to achieve complete dominance. While stablecoins and the future rise of autonomous Agent economies present potential growth avenues, they are not yet mainstream and still require integration with the existing financial system. For now, Agent-based transactions are largely used for speculative "volume boosting" rather than substantive business applications. Stripe's current move to acquire PayPal is seen as an attempt to bolster its weak consumer-facing (C-side) business after its stablecoin-focused strategies faltered. Meanwhile, PayPal is described as structurally outdated, unable to revive itself through new products like Venmo or PYUSD. The future of payments may lie not in payments themselves but in value-added services like more efficient settlement networks. The author suggests that companies like Stripe and Circle, which are building their own blockchains (Tempo, Arc) and stablecoins, are positioning themselves to eventually profit from high-efficiency settlement systems. These new networks could potentially bypass some traditional banking layers. In conclusion, the article posits that third-party payment is a perpetually fragmented battlefield where scale alone cannot ensure victory. Players must find new models, focusing on efficiency to compete with the entrenched banking system. Stripe's acquisition of PayPal represents a bet on this uncertain future.

链捕手43m ago

The Eternal Fragments of Money: Third-Party Payment Has No First Principle

链捕手43m ago

Trading

Spot
活动图片