COTI bought back all the market makers’ positions, and the discussion volume on the square immediately jumped to 2.7 times. It sounds like a clearing of positions and breaking even—how much did they buy? The official has said nothing, not a single word.
On September 18, they officially announced “COTI 2.0,” drawing a 30-day promise of new privacy integrations, token utility, and a new network. On September 24 and 25, the new CEO Robbie Vander Ghinste and the CMO Sara Bouchet went on Space and told a story about a “privacy payments entry point”—a VPN, sending transfers, and making money through travel scenarios enabled by payments. On September 28, during a CEO Q&A, the real background finally came out: this position was originally split between the team and an East Asian market maker; the other party didn’t meet liquidity obligations, and both sides went to court. The CEO also specifically denied rumors that “the team and the market maker shared a wallet.” Only on October 2 did they officially confirm: for the market maker’s portion, the team fully bought out, and both sides had already settled the deal.
A two-week hype cycle, with half the payout in a single day—the positions really did transfer, but the scale is the portion the official intentionally left blank. Out on the square, rumors like “supply tightening,” “locking,” and “burning” are all speculation: since they haven’t published any numbers, no lock-up announcement, and no burn announcement, this is simply a transfer of ownership, not evidence of supply tightening. As for the claim that COTI 2.0 has “first-tier liquidity for privacy payments,” that too is management’s own talking point, not audited data.
Even more importantly, from September 18 when the privacy payments story for COTI 2.0 was first pitched until now, they still haven’t released a single data point—fees, revenue, or user growth. It’s the old story repackaged in a new wrapper; it doesn’t count as incremental signaling.
The buyout action by the official is real, but the story used to support the price is still paper. This position transfer itself shouldn’t be taken as proof of supply tightening—I’m leaning bearish on this. Unless the official publishes the buyout quantity or a formal lock-up announcement, or unless the first version of COTI 2.0’s functionality truly goes live and produces concrete transaction data, this wave of sentiment won’t hold.
$COTI #privacy #cryptocurrency
On September 18, they officially announced “COTI 2.0,” drawing a 30-day promise of new privacy integrations, token utility, and a new network. On September 24 and 25, the new CEO Robbie Vander Ghinste and the CMO Sara Bouchet went on Space and told a story about a “privacy payments entry point”—a VPN, sending transfers, and making money through travel scenarios enabled by payments. On September 28, during a CEO Q&A, the real background finally came out: this position was originally split between the team and an East Asian market maker; the other party didn’t meet liquidity obligations, and both sides went to court. The CEO also specifically denied rumors that “the team and the market maker shared a wallet.” Only on October 2 did they officially confirm: for the market maker’s portion, the team fully bought out, and both sides had already settled the deal.
A two-week hype cycle, with half the payout in a single day—the positions really did transfer, but the scale is the portion the official intentionally left blank. Out on the square, rumors like “supply tightening,” “locking,” and “burning” are all speculation: since they haven’t published any numbers, no lock-up announcement, and no burn announcement, this is simply a transfer of ownership, not evidence of supply tightening. As for the claim that COTI 2.0 has “first-tier liquidity for privacy payments,” that too is management’s own talking point, not audited data.
Even more importantly, from September 18 when the privacy payments story for COTI 2.0 was first pitched until now, they still haven’t released a single data point—fees, revenue, or user growth. It’s the old story repackaged in a new wrapper; it doesn’t count as incremental signaling.
The buyout action by the official is real, but the story used to support the price is still paper. This position transfer itself shouldn’t be taken as proof of supply tightening—I’m leaning bearish on this. Unless the official publishes the buyout quantity or a formal lock-up announcement, or unless the first version of COTI 2.0’s functionality truly goes live and produces concrete transaction data, this wave of sentiment won’t hold.
$COTI #privacy #cryptocurrency