# Investors Related Articles

HTX News Center provides the latest articles and in-depth analysis on "Investors", covering market trends, project updates, tech developments, and regulatory policies in the crypto industry.

One Year After the Crash of Crypto Treasury Companies, Copycats Are Already Making a Comeback

One year after the collapse of digital asset treasury (DAT) companies, which wiped out up to 99% for early investors, the scheme has returned in a new guise. Recently, Triller Group announced it would become a "SpaceX treasury company," causing its market cap to surge. This follows the rebranding of another firm, LGHL, now targeting a token called HYPE. The original model, popularized by MicroStrategy (MSTR) and its "Bitcoin yield" narrative, saw companies trading at massive premiums to their underlying crypto holdings. However, most followers like TwentyOne, Metaplanet, and Nakamoto have crashed 80-95%+ from their peaks, erasing nearly all value for late investors. The author argues these structures have no fundamental reason to trade at premiums when low-fee Bitcoin ETFs or direct ownership exist. The cycle persists due to speculative demand driven by FOMO, gamification, and a belief the system is rigged, met by insiders and promoters who profit from the pump-and-dump dynamics. Drawing a parallel to the 1637 Tulip Mania, the piece concludes that such frenzies are not a bug but a recurring product of markets, where greater fools provide demand and insiders supply the schemes. Despite holding Bitcoin personally, the author condemns this specific packaging of assets into leveraged corporate vehicles marketed as innovation, a cycle seemingly unstoppable until a major crash.

marsbit06/29 03:42

One Year After the Crash of Crypto Treasury Companies, Copycats Are Already Making a Comeback

marsbit06/29 03:42

Why Do Crypto Projects Keep Changing Their Names?

**Why Do Crypto Projects Keep Changing Names?** In the crypto world, changing a project's name is common—over 16% of projects have done so, including major ones like Polygon (formerly Matic Network). This contrasts sharply with traditional businesses, which fiercely protect brand equity. The core reason is that in crypto, brand loyalty is often weak. Users are frequently investors, airdrop hunters, or yield seekers, not traditional consumers. A name associated with price crashes, hacks, or failed narratives becomes a liability, not an asset. Renaming can be a strategic reset to shed this baggage. Name changes serve as a potent marketing tool. They can signal a genuine pivot in strategy or scope (e.g., EthSign dropping "Eth" as it expanded). However, they are often used to "narrative surf," rebranding to align with hot trends like AI, RWA, or the metaverse (e.g., Elrond → MultiversX). Critically, renaming is also a PR tactic to distance a project from past failures like security breaches (e.g., Anyswap → Multichain). The most significant risk emerges when a name change is coupled with a token migration or swap. This process can allow projects to reset exchange price charts, erase visible historical downtrends, and create an illusion of a fresh start. It often facilitates liquidity resets, where low float can be exploited for pumps. More alarmingly, migrations sometimes mask overhauls to tokenomics, introducing substantial new token supply through "ecosystem funds" or "node rewards," effectively diluting existing holders. The fundamental issue isn't renaming itself, which can be valid for strategic evolution. The problem is when it functions as an escape from history—a way to avoid accountability for past mistakes, failed promises, and poor performance. When a project announces a rebrand, the critical questions are: What tangible new capability or strategy does it represent? Has the tokenomics changed? And what part of its past is it most trying to make users forget?

marsbit06/26 02:49

Why Do Crypto Projects Keep Changing Their Names?

marsbit06/26 02:49

The DeepSeek Financing Story

DeepSeek's financing round, totaling approximately 3 billion USD, concluded recently, revealing details about the process and key investors. The round was initiated around April with strict initial terms: a minimum commitment of 5 billion RMB, no syndication, and a pure RMB structure. These were later relaxed, with the minimum ticket size reduced to 1.5 billion RMB. A pivotal four-hour online investor meeting in mid-May served as the primary interaction for many backers with DeepSeek's founder, Liang Wenfeng. Despite not being a naturally eloquent speaker, Liang's philosophy deeply resonated. He consistently emphasized the company's singular focus on AGI (Artificial General Intelligence), the principle of "less is more," extreme caution in spending, and the paramount importance of team stability. His notable quotes included describing the team as "ordinary people doing extraordinary things" and stating that "AGI is a big enough thing; everything else is just process." The final investor list featured 10 entities, but underlying fund structures indicate participation from nearly 100 institutions and individuals. Notable lead investors include Monolith Capital (increasing its commitment from 1.5 to 3 billion RMB), Zhenxingu Capital, IDG Capital, and state-affiliated investors like Guozhitou. Conspicuously absent were major firms like Sequoia China and Hillhouse Capital, despite earlier speculation about their involvement. A core condition set by Liang Wenfeng for all investors, whether corporate or venture capital, was a strict prohibition against poaching DeepSeek employees or encouraging them to leave to start ventures. The financing process highlighted DeepSeek's unexpected openness to external capital, surprising many in the investment community. The company's low-profile nature, combined with its ambitious AGI vision and principled approach, fostered a sense of reverence among participating investors, many of whom were reluctant to discuss the deal publicly, preferring to maintain its discreet and purposeful ethos.

链捕手06/18 02:08

The DeepSeek Financing Story

链捕手06/18 02:08

The DeepSeek Fundraising Story

"The DeepSeek Funding Story: Insights from the $2.15 Billion Round" This article details behind-the-scenes narratives from DeepSeek's recent massive funding round. Key highlights include the legendary four-hour online investor meeting where CEO Liang Wenfeng, despite not being a charismatic speaker, impressed attendees with his focus on AGI and team stability. He emphasized the philosophy of "ordinary people doing extraordinary things" and a steadfast commitment to solely advancing intelligence. The fundraising process, initiated in April, saw initial demands for a minimum investment of 5 billion RMB, no syndication, and a pure RMB structure. These terms were later adjusted to a 1.5 billion RMB minimum to accommodate more investors. A notable absence was the lack of participation from major VC firms Sequoia China and Hillhouse Capital, despite early rumors, making IDG the only established VC in the final lineup. The investor list, while showing 10 entities, actually involved nearly 100 underlying institutions and individuals upon closer examination. Significant participants included Monolith Capital, which doubled its commitment to 3 billion RMB, and Zhenxingu Capital, an unexpected entrant. Liang Wenfeng's paramount condition for all investors was a strict agreement not to poach DeepSeek employees. The article reflects on DeepSeek's unexpected openness to funding and the mix of strategies—synergy, insight, brand alignment, and persistence—that secured investors a stake. The overarching sentiment among participants is one of pride and a shared belief in DeepSeek's potential to become a landmark Chinese company, driven by a profound sense of purpose in the AGI race.

marsbit06/18 02:06

The DeepSeek Fundraising Story

marsbit06/18 02:06

7 Key Questions Regarding 'DeepSeek Completes Over 50 Billion Yuan in Financing'

DeepSeek, the prominent Chinese AI company, has reportedly completed its first external funding round, raising over 50 billion RMB (approximately $6.9 billion USD), according to foreign media reports. This financing values the company at over $50 billion USD, a significant increase from a $10 billion valuation when the round began in April 2026. Founder Liang Wenfeng personally contributed 20 billion RMB, with other investors including Tencent, CATL (Contemporary Amperex Technology), JD.com, NetEase, and IDG Capital. Notably, the National Artificial Intelligence Industry Investment Fund also participated with a direct investment of 1 billion RMB. The funding round is distinctive for its structure. Most investors' capital is channeled into a limited partnership controlled by CEO Liang Wenfeng, rather than directly into DeepSeek. These investors face a five-year lock-up period, have no voting rights, but receive priority financial information and future investment rights. This arrangement is seen as a measure to ensure Liang's absolute control over the company's direction, aligning with its stated principles of prioritizing groundbreaking AGI (Artificial General Intelligence) research over short-term profitability. The report highlights strategic reasons for key investors. Tencent's involvement is viewed as a strategic alignment, building on existing collaborations. CATL's investment is linked to the critical energy and power infrastructure needed for AI data centers, a key growth area for the battery giant. The participation of a state-backed fund underscores the national strategic importance of AI development. Post-funding, DeepSeek is expected to accelerate infrastructure development, including building its own data centers, hire more talent, and release new model versions with enhanced capabilities like image and audio support. While this marks a major step, the company's long-term journey towards AGI remains a challenging path that will require balancing its foundational ideals with the expectations of its new investors.

marsbit06/16 10:28

7 Key Questions Regarding 'DeepSeek Completes Over 50 Billion Yuan in Financing'

marsbit06/16 10:28

活动图片