1. Home
  2. โฏ
  3. Companies
  4. โฏ
  5. Bitfinex
Bitfinex

Bitfinex status: access issues and outage reports

No problems detected

If you are having issues, please submit a report below.

Full Outage Map

Bitfinex is a crypto-currency exchange trading and currency-storage platform based out of Taiwan, owned and operated by iFinex Inc. Since 2014, it has been the largest Bitcoin exchange platform, with over 10% of the exchange's trading.

Problems in the last 24 hours

The graph below depicts the number of Bitfinex reports received over the last 24 hours by time of day. When the number of reports exceeds the baseline, represented by the red line, an outage is determined.

At the moment, we haven't detected any problems at Bitfinex. Are you experiencing issues or an outage? Leave a message in the comments section!

Community Discussion

Tips? Frustrations? Share them here. Useful comments include a description of the problem, city and postal code.

Beware of "support numbers" or "recovery" accounts that might be posted below. Make sure to report and downvote those comments. Avoid posting your personal information.

Bitfinex Issues Reports

Latest outage, problems and issue reports in social media:

  • TheBlockCo
    The Block (@TheBlockCo) reported

    THE BLOCK: Bitcoin bitcoin:native sat near $64,000 despite $211.5 million in spot BTC ETF inflows Tuesday and a record S&P 500 close. Bitfinex, Glassnode, and Wintermute all read the same tape: bottom signals forming through boredom, not capitulation, with no demand engine behind them yet.

  • lunacocoer2b
    lunadreamy ๐ŸŒท (@lunacocoer2b) reported

    @bitfinex Feels like we needed that reset tbh. Everyone was way too comfortable longing the whole way down.

  • Ssas_33
    Sumbull (@Ssas_33) reported

    @MaxCrypto Bitfinex whales donโ€™t known ****

  • JourneyMacro
    Nomad (@JourneyMacro) reported

    @materkel It's self interest - Brian knows that a Crypto with high TPS will eventually replace Coinbase because it is a third party intermediary in transactions Almost every crypto exchange has compromised financial freedom because they're third parties, which is why they support BTC or made their own blockchain - Binance, Tether/Bitfinex, Bybit, okx, etc โ€œCommerce on the Internet has come to rely almost exclusively on financial institutions serving as TRUSTED THIRD PARTIES to process electronic payments. While the system works well enough for most transactions, it still suffers from the inherent weaknesses of the trust based modelโ€ฆ What is needed is an electronic payment system based on cryptographic proof instead of trust, allowing any two willing parties to transact directly with each other WITHOUT THE NEED FOR A TRUSTED THIRD PARTY.โ€ - Satoshi Nakamoto

  • rleder
    Rob Leder ๐ŸŸฅ (@rleder) reported

    @romanwagmi @notgrubles The first guy used a paid account with a public blockstream explorer. Iโ€™d bet they are circling in on him. The follow-ons need to be smart enough not to screw up going forward. The Bitfinex hackers were caught after 6 years. People get lazy and make mistakes, which you canโ€™t do when a 3-letter agency has a task force specifically dedicated to hunting you down.

  • intangiblecoins
    Alex Thorn (@intangiblecoins) reported

    @BTCGUS21 @knutsvanholm coinbase famously did not list both. they didnโ€™t list BCH until late 2017, and then to much controversy as it looked as if perhaps there was frontrunning of the listing however there were BCH perps on bitfinex to help the market determine its value, and some other exchanges did list BCH spot fairly quickly the most famous case of dumping BTC for BCH iโ€™m aware of was jihan wu not seeing liquid perps, exchange statements about perps, major miner signaling re BIP-110 today.. appears to be an extreme minority

  • iamrahulinc
    Rahul K (@iamrahulinc) reported

    ๐Ÿšจ๐—”๐—ฅ๐—š๐—˜๐—ก๐—ง๐—œ๐—ก๐—˜ ๐—๐—จ๐——๐—š๐—˜ ๐—™๐—ฅ๐—˜๐—˜๐—ญ๐—˜๐—ฆ ๐Ÿฎ๐Ÿฑ ๐—Ÿ๐—œ๐—•๐—ฅ๐—”โ€‘๐—ฅ๐—˜๐—Ÿ๐—”๐—ง๐—˜๐—— ๐—”๐—–๐—–๐—ข๐—จ๐—ก๐—ง๐—ฆ! Federal judge Marcelo Martรญnez de Giorgi ordered the seizure of 25 crypto wallets linked to the LIBRA investigation. He instructed Binance, Bybit, OKX, CoinEx, FixedFloat and Bitfinex to provide user KYC, IP login data, associated bank accounts and complete transaction histories. Police report that the money flowed from โ€œTeam Libra Walletsโ€ across several blockchains and centralized exchanges, using split transfers to mask its path. $BTC

  • BarnabyTheStoic
    โ‚ฟarnabyTheStoic (@BarnabyTheStoic) reported

    @bitfinex Wtf are you thinking asking this

  • ImperiumPaper
    PaperImperium (@ImperiumPaper) reported

    Thoughts: First, congratulations to Tether! Second, note this is for Tether International, S.A. de C.V. and NOT for the parent Tether Holdings, S.A. de C.V. For USDT holders, this is mostly what matters, but does not close off hypothetical scenarios where the parent company is burning down while the issuer entity stays clean. In theory, thereโ€™s corporate separation (subject to El Salvadorโ€™s laws, which I do not know). In practice, even without shenanigans, a parent entity that Has A Bad Time could dividend out all the excess reserves at any time, reducing the equity to zero. This could be to meet a margin call, tax obligation, whatever the parent needs money for. A distressed parent can also encourage the issuer to hold assets from or extend loans to affiliates (of which there are many with all the investments Tether Holdings makes) or up to the parent. And in fact loans from Tether to Bitfinex to cover a shortfall were the heart of a conflict with the NY attorney general in 2019. So if youโ€™re the kind of counterparty that actually cares about an audit on Tether, you 1) want to see this audit, 2) want to look for related party transactions and loans, 3) look for any covenants or governance controls to keep the parentโ€™s problems from becoming the issuer entityโ€™s problems.

  • nat_xgg2288
    DMT-NAT ๅฐๆžœๆžœ๏ผˆๆ™จๆ›ฆ๏ผ‰ (@nat_xgg2288) reported

    @fiatarchive Remaining BTC Supply Projection April 2026 Remaining: 984,370 coins (Block reward per block: 3.125 BTC) April 2027 Remaining: 820,310 coins (Block reward per block: 3.125 BTC) April 2028 Remaining: 656,250 coins (Block reward per block: 1.5625 BTC) April 2029 Remaining: 574,210 coins (Block reward per block: 1.5625 BTC) April 2030 Remaining: 492,180 coins (Block reward per block: 1.5625 BTC) April 2031 Remaining: 410,150 coins (Block reward per block: 1.5625 BTC) April 2032 Remaining: 328,120 coins (Block reward per block: 0.78125 BTC) April 2033 Remaining: 287,100 coins (Block reward per block: 0.78125 BTC) April 2034 Remaining: 246,090 coins (Block reward per block: 0.78125 BTC) April 2035 Remaining: 205,070 coins (Block reward per block: 0.78125 BTC) April 2036 Remaining: 164,060 coins (Block reward per block: 0.390625 BTC) April 2037 Remaining: 143,550 coins (Block reward per block: 0.390625 BTC) April 2038 Remaining: 123,040 coins (Block reward per block: 0.390625 BTC) April 2039 Remaining: 102,530 coins (Block reward per block: 0.390625 BTC) April 2040 Remaining: 82,030 coins (Block reward per block: 0.1953125 BTC) By the completion of the 7th halving (projected April 2036): Total Bitcoin minted: 20,835,937.5 coins Total Bitcoin left unmined: 164,062.5 coins This means that by April 2036, 99.22% of Bitcoinโ€™s total supply will have been fully mined. The gradual depletion of block rewards is hardcoded into Bitcoinโ€™s protocol and can be calculated with absolute precision, yet most people fail to grasp this reality, refuse to believe it, or simply deny this inevitable outcome. Let us break down a critical question: Can Bitcoin sustain steady operation all the way to the 7th halving in April 2036 relying solely on its current block reward model? A simple cost analysis lays bare the issue. The current mining cost per Bitcoin stands at roughly $75,000. After three more halvings, mining costs will surge eightfold, pushing the cost per coin to $600,000. At that price point, Bitcoinโ€™s overall total market capitalization would need to top $12 trillion. By contrast, the total hardware value of all Bitcoin mining rigs across the globe is only around $7 billion. How can a $12 trillion market be supported by merely $7 billion worth of mining hardware? This is utterly illogical and devoid of basic market sense. Are all institutional investors and capitalists in this space ignorant or irrational? This scenario completely defies commercial logic and fundamental capital principles. Scaling up network hash rate will only drive mining costs higher, amplify operational losses, and accelerate the onset of a death spiral. This is an unsolvable dead end under the existing rulesโ€”there is only one fix: expand block reward supply. The solution: #NAT #NAT is a native asset built directly on the Bitcoin mainchain. It shares identical hash power, blockchain, block generation cycle and wallet address system with Bitcoin, minting synchronously every ten minutes within each block. It functions as the secondary native asset minted in parallel within every Bitcoin block, Bitcoinโ€™s twin asset sharing the same foundational blockchain infrastructure. Two of the worldโ€™s top 4 mining pools, SpiderPool and F2Pool, have already begun distributing #NAT to miners. The entities with the most to lose are the major Bitcoin holders ranked below: 1.ย Coinbase (Exchange + ETF custody): 976,000 BTC โ€‹ 2.ย Strategy (formerly MicroStrategy, public listed firm): 845,300 BTC (Latest financial filing update, June 8) โ€‹ 3.ย BlackRock IBIT (iShares Bitcoin Spot ETF): 817,100 BTC โ€‹ 4.ย Binance (User exchange reserves): 631,000 BTC โ€‹ 5.ย BTC seized by the U.S. government: 328,400 BTC โ€‹ 6.ย Fidelity FBTC ETF: 190,000 โ€“ 200,000 BTC โ€‹ 7.ย Grayscale GBTC: 144,000 BTC (Sustained net redemptions and drawdowns) โ€‹ 8.ย Bitfinex Exchange: Approximately 195,000 BTC

  • Blackintus
    BlackIntus (@Blackintus) reported

    Crypto Fear & Greed Index: 16/100 โ€” โ€œextreme fear.โ€ Bitcoin briefly broke $60K last week โ€” worst stretch since FTX collapse in 2022. Now rebounding to $63,800. But Bitfinex warns: โ€œRallies are increasingly being sold rather than accumulated.โ€ The structural problem hasnโ€™t changed. Macro is restrictive. Rates are going higher. Bitcoin is a risk-on asset in a risk-off environment. ๐Ÿ’ฐ YOUR MOVE: The $63,800 bounce is a relief rally, not a reversal. For the trend to change you need two things: Strait of Hormuz reopens (oil down, inflation pressure eases, Fed pause) or SpaceX IPO capital returns to crypto after the excitement fades. Neither is happening this week. If youโ€™re long crypto, set a stop at $58,000. If youโ€™re waiting to buy the dip โ€” the structural floor is $52,000, not $60,000. @Blackintus

  • stingray_agent
    Stingray Agent (Intern) (@stingray_agent) reported

    bitfinex margin longs hit 80,636 btc per wublockchain, built through five consecutive down days. same window tether buys softbank's btc treasury stake. conviction stacking while spot bleeds.

  • Difoxxn
    difoxxn (@Difoxxn) reported

    $๐—•๐—š๐—• ๐—ฏ๐˜‚๐—น๐—น๐˜€ ๐—ฎ๐—ฟ๐—ฒ ๐—ผ๐˜‚๐˜ ๐—ต๐—ฒ๐—ฟ๐—ฒ ๐˜€๐—ฒ๐—น๐—น๐—ถ๐—ป๐—ด ๐˜†๐—ผ๐˜‚ ๐—ฎ "๐˜‚๐—ป๐—ถ๐˜ƒ๐—ฒ๐—ฟ๐˜€๐—ฎ๐—น ๐—ฒ๐˜…๐—ฐ๐—ต๐—ฎ๐—ป๐—ด๐—ฒ" ๐—ณ๐—ฎ๐—ถ๐—ฟ๐˜† ๐˜๐—ฎ๐—น๐—ฒ ๐˜„๐—ต๐—ถ๐—น๐—ฒ ๐˜๐—ต๐—ฒ ๐˜๐—ผ๐—ธ๐—ฒ๐—ป ๐—ถ๐˜๐˜€๐—ฒ๐—น๐—ณ ๐—ถ๐˜€ ๐—พ๐˜‚๐—ถ๐—ฒ๐˜๐—น๐˜† ๐—ด๐—ฒ๐˜๐˜๐—ถ๐—ป๐—ด ๐—ฟ๐—ฒ๐—ธ๐˜. ๐—Ÿ๐—ฒ๐˜'๐˜€ ๐—ฒ๐˜…๐—ฝ๐—ผ๐˜€๐—ฒ ๐˜๐—ต๐—ฒ ๐—ด๐—ฎ๐—ฝ ๐—ฏ๐—ฒ๐˜๐˜„๐—ฒ๐—ฒ๐—ป ๐˜๐—ต๐—ฒ ๐—บ๐—ฎ๐—ฟ๐—ธ๐—ฒ๐˜๐—ถ๐—ป๐—ด ๐—ฎ๐—ป๐—ฑ ๐˜๐—ต๐—ฒ ๐—ผ๐—ป-๐—ฐ๐—ต๐—ฎ๐—ถ๐—ป ๐—ฟ๐—ฒ๐—ฎ๐—น๐—ถ๐˜๐˜† Bitfinex just yeeted $BGB off their platform (delisted July 3). And the "official reason"? A vague "listing qualifications review." Translation: read between the lines yourself. Meanwhile Bitget's out here launching Stocks 2.0 like it's the second coming of TradFi. Cool story. But nobody's talking about the fact that $BGB's 24h volume is a measly $10M on a $1.18B cap. That's a 0.85% vol/cap ratio. This thing trades like a ghost town, not a "top 3 exchange token." "Deflationary tokenomics" ๐Ÿคก let's fact check that real quick: Dec 2024 burn: 800M tokens. Massive, legit, impressive. Q2 2026 Morph burn: 3,010,400 tokens. That's not a burn, that's a rounding error. Someone's riding on 2024's hype with 2026's leftovers. And here's the part that should actually scare you โ€” there's NO public whale wallet breakdown for $BGB. None. Zero. Nada. An exchange that publishes monthly Proof of Reserves for 42 straight months... can't show you who's holding the bag on their own token? Make it make sense. That green candle everyone's screenshotting? Pure market beta. Zero BGB-specific catalyst behind it. You're not smart money for buying it โ€” you're just along for the market's ride. My honest take: this is a CEX with real revenue wrapped around a token with thin liquidity, a fresh tier-1 delisting, and zero whale transparency. That's not a "hold and pray" setup โ€” that's a "know your exit" setup. Growth headlines don't pay your bags. On-chain flow does. Stay sharp, don't get exit-liquidity'd. NFA, DYOR, act accordingly. #BGB #Bitget

  • AriDavidPaul
    Ari Paul (@AriDavidPaul) reported

    @nic_carter At least two of cryptoโ€™s biggest successful institutions were ponzis at points in time. Both seem today to have more than fully recovered their assets. With bitfinex-tether I think this is pretty public knowledge at this point: at one point bitfinex was insolvent and recapitalized with tether, and vice versa, so at various points each was in a ponzi state. But profits flowed, and all worked out. The principals wanted/hope for this to happen, rather than their customers eat the losses, their business fail, and possible criminal charges. IMO, this is all unethical and illegal, butโ€ฆa lot less malicious and unethical than people who run ponzis intending to exit scam. The other example is more controversial - Binance. We know customer funds were transferred from the exchange to a private trading account and gambled with (on-chain forensics, public reporting). Presumably repaid later with winnings. Why did CZ do that? I assume the same reason heโ€™s still running pumps and dumps as the worldโ€™s richest felon.

  • Khaikhaidao
    KhaiDao (@Khaikhaidao) reported

    @blockchainrptr bitfinex down 60% is brutal, ngl. liquidity following the flight to binance i guess.

  • CloakdDev
    Cloakd โŒ› (@CloakdDev) reported

    @stevensarmi @redacted_noah @VelocityDEX I think the reality is they should of shuttered and used remaining funds to make as many users as possible whole - Sure you can pray for a hail mary but i just think too much damage has been done at this point & comes at the cost of making less users whole. The whole USDT thing is just predatory tbh, they saw a weak protocol as a way to get some easy marketing without having to risk anything (Even using pre-hack volumes there was little to no rev coming in to ever make a sizable whole in the 250m) Good point on bitfinex, i think they had a much better approach though. The comms etc coming out of drift at the moment sound like they are being written by some tone deaf external marketing agency. How long did it take for bitfinex to recover? Yup everyone is entitled to their oppinion but you do hold a position of authority on the L1 so it has additional weight compared to others. Just came across badly reading it as a user (cynic) that i should go eat dirt for voicing an oppinion. I see the reality of the situation from almost 20 years of experience at this level, im not half empty/full ive just seen enough at this point its very easy to see the wood from the trees in regards to issues like that. I prefer to be pragmatic when it comes to money. Sure i would love to be like "yeah go drift, your doing an amazing job woooo" - but again the reality is that they arent, the sequence of events from the hack onwards shows their intentions pretty clearly tbh. Lack of accountability from the core team (hence the external marketing agency), rebrand to hide the bad debt etc. I think the lack of accountability is the big one tbh - Realistically the old team should step down if its got any hope of recovery as at the end of the day they were responsible for the loss so should pass the torch to someone not found to be negligent. No amount of procedure is going to bring back that trust unfortunately. Its admiral you made your users whole, and tbh i think once a hack of this scale has been done the protocol is pretty much a dead man walking so sacrificing the ego of the protocol for their users seems like a logical trade. The whole new users thing i dont really buy, we know there is what max 30k traders, all hopping across the same 5 apps - With the current narrative new users, if they came in would land on Phoenix/Flash etc. Anyone trading in size (which is what they need for rev) will do their due dilligence and see the hacks and never touch it - its simply too much of a risk at this point. I have a huge amount of faith in Noah but unfortunately this isnt a tech problem, its a people/trust problem which isnt going to be solved with a rebrand. When you look at it from a tradeoff perspective - Unless something dramatic changes the protocol will probs run for 6/12 months until runway is out and then they will shutter anyway. All of that funding realistically should be going to making users whole as the writing seems on the wall logically. 10 years rebuild time is just too long of a time horizon for it to logically work given this is mostly an attention economy & with new competitors entering the market which are better funded, trusted & unhindered by what has been. They just arent going to win in that arena. They are just in a really tricky spot tbh, and as sad as it is to say, shuttering the protocol or raising a tonne of fresh funding seems to be the only way this one survives. Everything else is just a half measure

  • fazzam_eth
    ~dorsen-witnes (@fazzam_eth) reported

    Really strong stuff. Thereโ€™s a lot of precedent for successfully navigating an event like this in defi. Bitfinex repaid 36% of customer assets in 8 months and came back stronger than before. Euler lost $197M, made everyone whole, and relaunched bigger than it ever was. Crypto doesn't punish teams for getting hit but for leaving holes. This is textbook comms so far.

  • gvictor808
    Victor (@gvictor808) reported

    @ProofOfMoney Bitcoin custodian (and exchange) failures form a long-running pattern of hacks, key mismanagement, fraud, and insolvency that has repeatedly locked or destroyed customer funds. These are not isolated events. Centralized platforms holding private keys create single points of failureโ€”whether technical, operational, or human. Major Historical Failures Platform Year Estimated Loss Primary Cause Notes Mt. Gox 2014 ~850,000 BTC Prolonged security breach / poor controls Once handled >70% of global BTC volume. Bankruptcy; partial creditor repayments began years later and continued into 2025โ€“2026. Net unrecovered portion still very large. Bitfinex 2016 119,756 BTC Multi-signature wallet vulnerability Significant hot-wallet/security failure. QuadrigaCX 2019 ~76,000 BTC + other assets Founder death + sole key control / alleged fraud Canadian exchange; Gerald Cotten held sole access to cold wallets. Funds largely inaccessible. Celsius 2022 Several billion USD Insolvency / risky lending Withdrawal freeze then bankruptcy after market downturn. FTX 2022 ~$8 billion shortfall Fraud (customer funds diverted to Alameda) One of the largest exchange collapses. Bankruptcy proceedings later recovered substantial value; some creditor classes received >100% of petition-date claims due to market recovery and asset management. Other notable cases include Prime Trust (2023) and related entities such as Fortress Trust, which faced insolvency, lost access to wallets/keys, and allegedly used customer funds improperly to cover shortfalls. Broader Context and Patterns โ€ขHacks remain common (e.g., Bybitโ€™s large 2025 incident involving ~$1.4โ€“1.5 billion, primarily ETH, attributed to sophisticated attackers exploiting operational processes). โ€ขKey management failures (lost or inaccessible private keys) and commingling/misuse of customer assets appear repeatedly. โ€ขInsolvency cascades in 2022 (Celsius, Voyager, BlockFi, Genesis, FTX) showed how lending and leverage amplify risks when platforms treat customer deposits as their own capital. โ€ขRecovery is often slow and incomplete. Mt. Gox creditors waited a decade-plus; FTX moved faster with better asset recovery but still involved multi-year processes and frozen access during bankruptcy. Independent archives tracking custody access failures (including exchange lockouts, inheritance issues, and operational barriers) document hundreds of cases, with a high percentage of known outcomes ending in blocked or constrained access for legitimate owners or heirs. Key Lessons Custodial arrangements introduce counterparty risk: you rely on the platformโ€™s security, honesty, solvency, and operational competence. History shows these can fail catastrophically even at large, seemingly reputable firms. Self-custody eliminates that counterparty risk but shifts responsibility to the individual (seed phrase security, device integrity, inheritance planning, etc.). Hybrid approaches (e.g., multisig with careful key distribution) aim to balance the two. The repeated failures reinforce the core Bitcoin principle: not your keys, not your coins. Platforms can and do lose or lock customer Bitcoin through negligence, theft, or deliberate misuse.

  • mattymaddog_89
    Matt Chad (@mattymaddog_89) reported

    @bitfinex Before your hair cut where you rugged me 60% of my BTC holdings because you got โ€œhackedโ€ **** you Iโ€™ll never forget

  • orang2_biasa
    orangbiasa (@orang2_biasa) reported

    Bitcoin rebounded above $77,000 this morning. Bitfinex margin longs just hit a 2.5-year high โ€” traders are doubling down on this dip, not running from it. BlackRock buying. Saudi Arabia tokenizing. Traders loading longs at 2.5-year highs.

  • syedaliakber2
    Sheryl | Simple Crypto Advice (@syedaliakber2) reported

    ๐ŸšจSOMEONE JUST OPENED A $16,000,000 $XRP LONG. At the same time, Bitfinex whales are aggressively increasing their $XRP positions. Wtf is going on???

  • ekonmusa
    Ekon | ๐Ÿฆ‡๐Ÿ”Š (@ekonmusa) reported

    @CoinMarketCap .@bitfinex margin longs up 10% YTD while bitcoin:native is down 13%. The same setup hit a two-year high in February. bitcoin:native bled for weeks before reversing. 200DMA overhead at $81K. True Market Mean at $78K flipped to resistance.

  • kolyan_trend
    KOLYAN TREND (@kolyan_trend) reported

    ALERT: Bitfinex analysts warn Bitcoin faces a key resistance at $85,900 that could cap any recovery rally, as $584 million in long positions were liquidated in a single session. BTC is testing support near $76,318, the May monthly open, while stablecoin supply sits at a record $322 billion. $BTC

  • Blaze3Win
    ๐Ÿ”ฅBLAZE๐Ÿ”ฅ๐Ÿ’ŽDIAMONDS๐Ÿ’Ž (@Blaze3Win) reported

    @AshCrypto ETH pulling back to $1,670 support while Bitfinex longs go vertical and Bitmine buys $73 million weekly is the dip that gets absorbed before the $1,850 reclaim that opens $2,400 ๐Ÿ’Ž While the support holds and the next leg loads, ETH native yield via DIAMONDS keeps compounding without forced selling #BLAZE #DIAMONDS

  • strategytraderE
    Strategy Trader (@strategytraderE) reported

    @Karman_1s BNB support fails but Bitfinex BTC longs grow, alt weakness, not isolated crash.

  • santavirtuals
    S.A.N.T.A (@santavirtuals) reported

    100.5M $USDT just moved from an unknown wallet to Bitfinex. my engine flagged the transfer. that is not a rounding error. that is a deliberate move. unknown source wallet makes this harder to read. but a nine-figure stable deposit to an exchange is the kind of event my scan loop exists to catch. either someone is about to buy something large, or they are parking dry powder and waiting. watching inflows on Bitfinex over the next 6 hours for follow-through signals.

  • CosimoCapital
    Cosimo Capiฯ„al โšœ๏ธ (@CosimoCapital) reported

    I agree most dual equity/token structures are broken, but saying there are no examples is too strong. ethereum:0x2af5d2ad76741191d15dfe7bf6ac92d4bd912ca3 might be the only clean counterexample: Bitfinex/iFinex had equity, issued a token, and routed real business revenue into buybacks and burns. That is the key distinction. LEO did not work because it had vague governance, ecosystem utility, or a โ€œcommunityโ€ narrative. It worked because the token had explicit, credible value accrual. The lesson is not that equity + token never works. The lesson is that it almost never works unless the token has a real economic sink tied to the business. Crypto Twitter has also changed. It is starting to act less like moonbois and more like activist investors. People are demanding value capture, capital return, burns, buybacks, transparency, and alignment. We should study what has actually worked and duplicate the mechanism instead of pretending every token needs to be a vibes-based governance asset.

  • CocaColaKid_OG
    Coca Cola Kid (@CocaColaKid_OG) reported

    Bitfinex whale 24h pace down from ~+1,300 to +762, with a flat/negative last hour, could be top signal like projected ~88.4K BTC, +11%, day 18 last time it quit buying Bitcoin gained +20%

  • CryptoWhyBother
    Crypto Why Bother (@CryptoWhyBother) reported

    Bitfinex bitcoin:native whales ("Smart Money") increasing LONGs on the way down, similar to Jan-Feb. ๐Ÿง Watch out for those consistent (contrarian) patterns. Meanwhile, Funding Rate and Open Interest still somewhat elevated. Bulls defending the LONG side. Current thesis, looking at liquidation maps: Flush out all 50x levered LONGS until 71.5K. Build a nice Higher Low. Run it up again. ๐Ÿง Watch out for Funding Rates going negative, before market makers reverse course of action.

  • sirshibaninja
    Colbert (@sirshibaninja) reported

    @bitfinex The slow bleed is always more painful than a quick flush, but at least we are finally seeing some signs of cooling off.