Names like “moving things outside the chain into contracts” and the like: on Binance, the three listed venues differ in size by nearly an order of magnitude. Uma is about $38.06 million, with 7-day performance of +7.01% and 30-day +11.33%. Gnosis is about $302 million, with -3.12% over 7 days and -5.93% over 30 days. Band is about $40.69 million, with +11.16% over 7 days and +27.78% over 30 days. The two windows that push the other two forward are the longer ones. On Binance, the order books for all three also look different from the platform token BNB—those three can be seen there as well.
In the same week, an overseas prediction market turned “whether a few of the biggest banks go under by year-end” into a quoted contract: the front-most tier is priced at 9, and the price itself is the probability.
Most single-bank contracts only bet a few hundred dollars, while the two biggest banks have positions in the thousands. This batch of contracts expiring at year-end totals roughly $76,000; the earlier batch is $591,000. As the scale shrinks back, look for attention moving upward.
I checked the “attention on the other side”: a few weeks ago, someone brought a contract to a senior official at that country’s deposit insurance agency, asking whether it has any legitimate use and whether the agency’s own terms block insiders. That agency also has an unpublished list of “problem banks,” and after discussion, the terms were deemed sufficient. The head of that agency said back in March that what he feared was exactly someone using the agency to bet on the timing of bank failures. Regulated domestic exchanges in that country don’t offer these contracts—the ones hosting them are overseas platforms.
The former head said these contracts insert an incentive into the banking system: release rumors, amplify them, and trigger panic. The platform’s chief legal officer replied that a low probability is precisely evidence against fabricated panic.
Since there’s no way to account for where the $76,000 for this attention came from, the clue that gets put on the table is “who knew first.” The signal for the revised reading is scale: if within a single quarter the combined notional of this batch of contracts crosses one million dollars and the contract terms discussions don’t leave any publicly posted revisions, then they’re void on the spot. If the scale still stays at the level of tens of thousands of dollars, then this reading still holds. For anyone who wants to double-check the quote themselves, any idle portion of the funds could just be left to earn interest—Binance has made public provisions for this kind of balances. This article records an opinion and does not constitute investment advice.$RARE
$MUBARAK
$PHA
#polymarket银行倒闭押注引fdic关注
In the same week, an overseas prediction market turned “whether a few of the biggest banks go under by year-end” into a quoted contract: the front-most tier is priced at 9, and the price itself is the probability.
Most single-bank contracts only bet a few hundred dollars, while the two biggest banks have positions in the thousands. This batch of contracts expiring at year-end totals roughly $76,000; the earlier batch is $591,000. As the scale shrinks back, look for attention moving upward.
I checked the “attention on the other side”: a few weeks ago, someone brought a contract to a senior official at that country’s deposit insurance agency, asking whether it has any legitimate use and whether the agency’s own terms block insiders. That agency also has an unpublished list of “problem banks,” and after discussion, the terms were deemed sufficient. The head of that agency said back in March that what he feared was exactly someone using the agency to bet on the timing of bank failures. Regulated domestic exchanges in that country don’t offer these contracts—the ones hosting them are overseas platforms.
The former head said these contracts insert an incentive into the banking system: release rumors, amplify them, and trigger panic. The platform’s chief legal officer replied that a low probability is precisely evidence against fabricated panic.
Since there’s no way to account for where the $76,000 for this attention came from, the clue that gets put on the table is “who knew first.” The signal for the revised reading is scale: if within a single quarter the combined notional of this batch of contracts crosses one million dollars and the contract terms discussions don’t leave any publicly posted revisions, then they’re void on the spot. If the scale still stays at the level of tens of thousands of dollars, then this reading still holds. For anyone who wants to double-check the quote themselves, any idle portion of the funds could just be left to earn interest—Binance has made public provisions for this kind of balances. This article records an opinion and does not constitute investment advice.$RARE
$MUBARAK
$PHA
#polymarket银行倒闭押注引fdic关注
