Written by Haotian To be honest, the black swan event of October 11th made me, an originally optimistic industry observer, feel a sense of despair. I originally understood the current "Three Kingdoms" situation in the crypto industry, thinking that it was a fight between the gods and retail investors would get some meat. However, after experiencing this bloodbath and unraveling the underlying logic, I found that this was not the case. To put it bluntly, we originally thought that the technical community was innovating, exchanges were generating traffic, and Wall Street was allocating funds. The three parties were each doing their own thing. As long as we retail investors seize the opportunity, follow the wave of technological innovation, take advantage of hot spots, and rush in when funds enter the market, we can always get a share of the profits. However, after experiencing the bloodbath on October 11, I suddenly realized that these three parties might not be competing in an orderly manner at all, but were instead harvesting all the liquidity in the market? The first force: exchanges monopolize traffic and are vampires that control traffic and liquidity pools. To be honest, I used to think that exchanges just wanted to expand their platforms, increase traffic, expand their ecosystems, and make a lot of money. However, the USDe's cross-margin liquidation incident exposed the powerlessness of retail investors under the rules of the exchange platform. The leverage level increased by the platform to improve the product and service experience and the unclear risk control capabilities are actually traps for retail investors. Various rebate programs, Alpha and MEME launch pads, various revolving loans, and highly leveraged contract trading methods are constantly emerging. While these seemingly offer retail investors numerous profit opportunities, if exchanges can no longer withstand the risk of on-chain DeFi cascading liquidations, retail investors will also be dragged down. Life is like that. What's particularly frightening is that the top 10 exchanges generated $21.6 trillion in trading volume in Q2, yet overall market liquidity is declining. Where did the money go? Besides transaction fees, there's also various liquidations. Who's draining the liquidity? The second force: Wall Street capital, entering the market under the guise of compliance I was particularly looking forward to Wall Street entering the market, thinking that institutional funds could bring greater stability to the market. After all, institutions are long-term players and can bring incremental injections into the market. We will then reap the industry dividends of the integration of Crypto and TradFi. However, before this recent plunge, there were reports of whales profiting from precise short selling. Several wallets, suspected to be Wall Street structures, initiated massive airdrop positions before the crash, generating hundreds of millions in profits. Similar reports abound, resembling insider information. However, in these moments of panic, it makes one wonder: how do institutions consistently gain the advantage of "front-loading" before black swan events? These TradFi institutions, under the guise of compliance and capital, are actually entering the market. What are they actually doing? Using stablecoin public chains to tie up the DeFi ecosystem, using ETF channels to control capital flows, and using various financial tools to gradually erode the market's voice? On the surface, they claim to be doing this for industry development, but what is the reality? There are too many conspiracy theories about the Trump family's wealth to elaborate on. The third force: technology natives + retail developers, cannon fodder caught in the middle. I think this is where most of the retail investors, developers, and so-called builders in the market are truly desperate. Since last year, it has been said that many altcoins have been brought down, but this time it directly broke through to zero, forcing people to see the facts clearly: the liquidity of many altcoins is almost exhausted. The problem is, infra technical debt is piling up, application rollouts are failing to meet expectations, and developers are toiling away on building, only to find the market isn't buying it. Therefore, I can't see how the altcoin market will rebound. I don't understand how these altcoin projects will seize liquidity from exchanges, or how they will compete with Wall Street institutions in their ability to manipulate prices. If the market doesn't buy into the narrative, if the market is left with only so-called meme gambling, then the altcoin market will be a complete liquidation and reshuffle. Developers will flee, and there will be a structured reshuffle of market participants. Will the market return to nothingness? Oh, it's too difficult! so..... If the crypto industry's "Three Kingdoms" situation continues, with exchanges monopolizing the market, Wall Street profiting, and retail investors and technical analysts being domineering, this will be a disaster for the cyclical nature of crypto trading. In the long run, the market will only leave a few short-term winners and all long-term losers.Written by Haotian To be honest, the black swan event of October 11th made me, an originally optimistic industry observer, feel a sense of despair. I originally understood the current "Three Kingdoms" situation in the crypto industry, thinking that it was a fight between the gods and retail investors would get some meat. However, after experiencing this bloodbath and unraveling the underlying logic, I found that this was not the case. To put it bluntly, we originally thought that the technical community was innovating, exchanges were generating traffic, and Wall Street was allocating funds. The three parties were each doing their own thing. As long as we retail investors seize the opportunity, follow the wave of technological innovation, take advantage of hot spots, and rush in when funds enter the market, we can always get a share of the profits. However, after experiencing the bloodbath on October 11, I suddenly realized that these three parties might not be competing in an orderly manner at all, but were instead harvesting all the liquidity in the market? The first force: exchanges monopolize traffic and are vampires that control traffic and liquidity pools. To be honest, I used to think that exchanges just wanted to expand their platforms, increase traffic, expand their ecosystems, and make a lot of money. However, the USDe's cross-margin liquidation incident exposed the powerlessness of retail investors under the rules of the exchange platform. The leverage level increased by the platform to improve the product and service experience and the unclear risk control capabilities are actually traps for retail investors. Various rebate programs, Alpha and MEME launch pads, various revolving loans, and highly leveraged contract trading methods are constantly emerging. While these seemingly offer retail investors numerous profit opportunities, if exchanges can no longer withstand the risk of on-chain DeFi cascading liquidations, retail investors will also be dragged down. Life is like that. What's particularly frightening is that the top 10 exchanges generated $21.6 trillion in trading volume in Q2, yet overall market liquidity is declining. Where did the money go? Besides transaction fees, there's also various liquidations. Who's draining the liquidity? The second force: Wall Street capital, entering the market under the guise of compliance I was particularly looking forward to Wall Street entering the market, thinking that institutional funds could bring greater stability to the market. After all, institutions are long-term players and can bring incremental injections into the market. We will then reap the industry dividends of the integration of Crypto and TradFi. However, before this recent plunge, there were reports of whales profiting from precise short selling. Several wallets, suspected to be Wall Street structures, initiated massive airdrop positions before the crash, generating hundreds of millions in profits. Similar reports abound, resembling insider information. However, in these moments of panic, it makes one wonder: how do institutions consistently gain the advantage of "front-loading" before black swan events? These TradFi institutions, under the guise of compliance and capital, are actually entering the market. What are they actually doing? Using stablecoin public chains to tie up the DeFi ecosystem, using ETF channels to control capital flows, and using various financial tools to gradually erode the market's voice? On the surface, they claim to be doing this for industry development, but what is the reality? There are too many conspiracy theories about the Trump family's wealth to elaborate on. The third force: technology natives + retail developers, cannon fodder caught in the middle. I think this is where most of the retail investors, developers, and so-called builders in the market are truly desperate. Since last year, it has been said that many altcoins have been brought down, but this time it directly broke through to zero, forcing people to see the facts clearly: the liquidity of many altcoins is almost exhausted. The problem is, infra technical debt is piling up, application rollouts are failing to meet expectations, and developers are toiling away on building, only to find the market isn't buying it. Therefore, I can't see how the altcoin market will rebound. I don't understand how these altcoin projects will seize liquidity from exchanges, or how they will compete with Wall Street institutions in their ability to manipulate prices. If the market doesn't buy into the narrative, if the market is left with only so-called meme gambling, then the altcoin market will be a complete liquidation and reshuffle. Developers will flee, and there will be a structured reshuffle of market participants. Will the market return to nothingness? Oh, it's too difficult! so..... If the crypto industry's "Three Kingdoms" situation continues, with exchanges monopolizing the market, Wall Street profiting, and retail investors and technical analysts being domineering, this will be a disaster for the cyclical nature of crypto trading. In the long run, the market will only leave a few short-term winners and all long-term losers.

Exchange monopoly, Wall Street harvesting, and the desperate situation of retail investors

2025/10/12 13:48

Written by Haotian

To be honest, the black swan event of October 11th made me, an originally optimistic industry observer, feel a sense of despair.

I originally understood the current "Three Kingdoms" situation in the crypto industry, thinking that it was a fight between the gods and retail investors would get some meat. However, after experiencing this bloodbath and unraveling the underlying logic, I found that this was not the case.

To put it bluntly, we originally thought that the technical community was innovating, exchanges were generating traffic, and Wall Street was allocating funds. The three parties were each doing their own thing. As long as we retail investors seize the opportunity, follow the wave of technological innovation, take advantage of hot spots, and rush in when funds enter the market, we can always get a share of the profits.

However, after experiencing the bloodbath on October 11, I suddenly realized that these three parties might not be competing in an orderly manner at all, but were instead harvesting all the liquidity in the market?

The first force: exchanges monopolize traffic and are vampires that control traffic and liquidity pools.

To be honest, I used to think that exchanges just wanted to expand their platforms, increase traffic, expand their ecosystems, and make a lot of money. However, the USDe's cross-margin liquidation incident exposed the powerlessness of retail investors under the rules of the exchange platform. The leverage level increased by the platform to improve the product and service experience and the unclear risk control capabilities are actually traps for retail investors.

Various rebate programs, Alpha and MEME launch pads, various revolving loans, and highly leveraged contract trading methods are constantly emerging. While these seemingly offer retail investors numerous profit opportunities, if exchanges can no longer withstand the risk of on-chain DeFi cascading liquidations, retail investors will also be dragged down. Life is like that.

What's particularly frightening is that the top 10 exchanges generated $21.6 trillion in trading volume in Q2, yet overall market liquidity is declining. Where did the money go? Besides transaction fees, there's also various liquidations. Who's draining the liquidity?

The second force: Wall Street capital, entering the market under the guise of compliance

I was particularly looking forward to Wall Street entering the market, thinking that institutional funds could bring greater stability to the market. After all, institutions are long-term players and can bring incremental injections into the market. We will then reap the industry dividends of the integration of Crypto and TradFi.

However, before this recent plunge, there were reports of whales profiting from precise short selling. Several wallets, suspected to be Wall Street structures, initiated massive airdrop positions before the crash, generating hundreds of millions in profits. Similar reports abound, resembling insider information. However, in these moments of panic, it makes one wonder: how do institutions consistently gain the advantage of "front-loading" before black swan events?

These TradFi institutions, under the guise of compliance and capital, are actually entering the market. What are they actually doing? Using stablecoin public chains to tie up the DeFi ecosystem, using ETF channels to control capital flows, and using various financial tools to gradually erode the market's voice? On the surface, they claim to be doing this for industry development, but what is the reality? There are too many conspiracy theories about the Trump family's wealth to elaborate on.

The third force: technology natives + retail developers, cannon fodder caught in the middle.

I think this is where most of the retail investors, developers, and so-called builders in the market are truly desperate. Since last year, it has been said that many altcoins have been brought down, but this time it directly broke through to zero, forcing people to see the facts clearly: the liquidity of many altcoins is almost exhausted.

The problem is, infra technical debt is piling up, application rollouts are failing to meet expectations, and developers are toiling away on building, only to find the market isn't buying it.

Therefore, I can't see how the altcoin market will rebound. I don't understand how these altcoin projects will seize liquidity from exchanges, or how they will compete with Wall Street institutions in their ability to manipulate prices. If the market doesn't buy into the narrative, if the market is left with only so-called meme gambling, then the altcoin market will be a complete liquidation and reshuffle. Developers will flee, and there will be a structured reshuffle of market participants. Will the market return to nothingness? Oh, it's too difficult!

so.....

If the crypto industry's "Three Kingdoms" situation continues, with exchanges monopolizing the market, Wall Street profiting, and retail investors and technical analysts being domineering, this will be a disaster for the cyclical nature of crypto trading.

In the long run, the market will only leave a few short-term winners and all long-term losers.

Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact [email protected] for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

Vitalik Buterin Proposes Ethereum Gas Futures Market for Long-Term Fee Predictability

Vitalik Buterin Proposes Ethereum Gas Futures Market for Long-Term Fee Predictability

The post Vitalik Buterin Proposes Ethereum Gas Futures Market for Long-Term Fee Predictability appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Vitalik Buterin proposes an on-chain futures market for Ethereum gas, allowing users to pre-buy and lock in fees before potential price surges. This mechanism would provide long-term predictability for BASEFEE, helping developers and businesses plan transactions amid network volatility. Buterin’s vision introduces futures trading for gas, securing costs in advance for future Ethereum transactions. This system generates market-driven signals for BASEFEE evolution, reducing uncertainty in fee planning. Early projects like Oiler have tested gas derivatives, but a mature market is needed; Ethereum’s BASEFEE has fluctuated up to 200% in past cycles, per network data. Ethereum gas futures: Vitalik Buterin’s plan to pre-buy fees and stabilize costs. Discover how this on-chain market could transform transaction predictability—explore Ethereum’s future now! What is Vitalik Buterin’s Proposal for Pre-Buying Ethereum Gas? Vitalik Buterin, Ethereum’s co-founder, is advocating for an on-chain futures market that enables users to pre-buy gas at fixed prices, addressing the network’s long-standing issue of unpredictable transaction fees. This approach shifts focus from immediate cost reductions to long-term fee stability, allowing individuals and organizations to hedge against future spikes in BASEFEE. By creating a dedicated trading platform within Ethereum, Buterin aims to make gas pricing more transparent and manageable, fostering greater confidence in the ecosystem’s economic model. How Would an Ethereum Gas Futures Market Function? Ethereum’s current gas fee system relies on dynamic pricing through the EIP-1559 mechanism, where BASEFEE adjusts based on network congestion, often leading to volatility that can surge by over 150% during peak periods, as observed in historical data from the Ethereum Foundation’s reports. Buterin’s proposed futures market would operate as a decentralized exchange for gas contracts, where traders buy and sell claims to future gas units at agreed-upon prices. This market-driven mechanism would aggregate collective expectations, providing real-time signals on anticipated BASEFEE trends—such as potential increases tied…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/12/07 18:31
UK Looks to US to Adopt More Crypto-Friendly Approach

UK Looks to US to Adopt More Crypto-Friendly Approach

The post UK Looks to US to Adopt More Crypto-Friendly Approach appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. The UK and US are reportedly preparing to deepen cooperation on digital assets, with Britain looking to copy the Trump administration’s crypto-friendly stance in a bid to boost innovation.  UK Chancellor Rachel Reeves and US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent discussed on Tuesday how the two nations could strengthen their coordination on crypto, the Financial Times reported on Tuesday, citing people familiar with the matter.  The discussions also involved representatives from crypto companies, including Coinbase, Circle Internet Group and Ripple, with executives from the Bank of America, Barclays and Citi also attending, according to the report. The agreement was made “last-minute” after crypto advocacy groups urged the UK government on Thursday to adopt a more open stance toward the industry, claiming its cautious approach to the sector has left the country lagging in innovation and policy.  Source: Rachel Reeves Deal to include stablecoins, look to unlock adoption Any deal between the countries is likely to include stablecoins, the Financial Times reported, an area of crypto that US President Donald Trump made a policy priority and in which his family has significant business interests. The Financial Times reported on Monday that UK crypto advocacy groups also slammed the Bank of England’s proposal to limit individual stablecoin holdings to between 10,000 British pounds ($13,650) and 20,000 pounds ($27,300), claiming it would be difficult and expensive to implement. UK banks appear to have slowed adoption too, with around 40% of 2,000 recently surveyed crypto investors saying that their banks had either blocked or delayed a payment to a crypto provider.  Many of these actions have been linked to concerns over volatility, fraud and scams. The UK has made some progress on crypto regulation recently, proposing a framework in May that would see crypto exchanges, dealers, and agents treated similarly to traditional finance firms, with…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 02:21