Crypto World
Strategy stopped buying Bitcoin. The flywheel runs backward
Four weeks without adding a coin, two of them spent selling, a $1.25 billion sale authorization on file, and stock sales now funding a cash pile instead of Bitcoin. The most influential machine in crypto has shifted into reverse, and the entire treasury sector is watching its own future run at MicroStrategy speed.
Summary
- Strategy has gone four consecutive weeks without increasing its Bitcoin position, its longest such stretch in two years: two weeks of selling followed by two weeks of no purchases, with holdings parked at 843,775 BTC since selling 3,588 coins for roughly $216 million to fund dividends.
- The famous flywheel has inverted. The company is still raising money, $466.7 million one week, $263.5 million the next, but proceeds now build a US dollar reserve of $3.2 billion instead of buying coins.
- The trigger is arithmetic: MSTR trades below the value of its own Bitcoin, with enterprise mNAV under 1, making share issuance to buy coins dilutive, while preferred dividends, with STRC raised to 12%, must be paid in cash the model never budgeted for.
- The reversal is systemic, not just corporate: Strategy invented the treasury-company playbook that dozens of imitators copied, and its shift to selling coins and hoarding cash rewrites the template while Capital B reverse-splits and MARA liquidates.
- The question the market is actually pricing: whether this is a disciplined pause by a company managing through a 50% Bitcoin drawdown, or the beginning of the sequence skeptics always predicted, where the largest corporate holder becomes the seller of last resort.
For five years, the most reliable event in crypto was not the halving or the Fed meeting. It was Michael Saylor’s Sunday night chart. The orange dots, the coy caption, the Monday 8-K, another tranche of Bitcoin added to the largest corporate stack on earth: 108 purchases, 843,775 coins, a ritual so dependable that traders built indicators around it and dozens of companies built entire business models by imitation.
The ritual has stopped. Strategy has now gone four consecutive weeks without adding a single Bitcoin, its longest fallow stretch in two years, and the composition of those weeks is the story: two of them were spent selling, 3,588 BTC liquidated for roughly $216 million to pay preferred dividends, under a standing authorization to sell up to $1.25 billion more. The company is still raising hundreds of millions weekly through stock sales, and the money now flows to a $3.2 billion cash reserve instead of coins.
Every component of the famous flywheel, issue stock, buy Bitcoin, watch the premium expand, issue more, is still moving. It is simply moving in the other direction, and because Strategy wrote the playbook that a whole sector runs on, the reversal is not one company’s capital management. It is the treasury era’s first controlled test of its own exit ramp.
The machine, and what seized it
To understand the reversal, state the original machine precisely, because its elegance was always its fragility.
Strategy’s model was a premium harvester. The company sold MSTR shares through at-the-market programs at a market capitalization above the value of its Bitcoin, the mNAV premium, and converted the proceeds into coins. Each purchase grew Bitcoin per share, the premium justified itself as amplified BTC exposure with index membership and options liquidity attached, and the loop compounded: at the peak, the market paid well over two dollars for a dollar of Strategy’s Bitcoin, and the machine converted that enthusiasm into 45,000 coins in a single month as late as the spring, the fastest accumulation pace in a year. Layered on top came the preferred stock complex, STRK, STRF, STRC, perpetual instruments sold to yield-hungry buyers, whose dividends were comfortably serviceable as long as the common-stock machine ran.
Then the input variable moved. Bitcoin’s slide from its October peak near $126,000 to below $60,000 dragged MSTR down 82% from its high, and on June 27 the number that governs everything crossed its threshold: enterprise mNAV, the company’s market value including debt and preferreds measured against its Bitcoin, fell below 1. The market now values Strategy at less than its own coins. At that level the flywheel’s core transaction inverts: issuing stock to buy Bitcoin destroys Bitcoin-per-share instead of growing it, every ATM dollar is dilutive by construction, and the premium harvester has no premium to harvest. Simultaneously the preferred complex’s dividends, obligations in cash, kept compounding against a falling asset, with STRC’s rate raised to 12% in an effort to defend a price that had collapsed into the seventies. The machine’s two assumptions, a durable premium and trivially fundable dividends, failed in the same quarter.
What the company actually did
Strategy’s response, reconstructed from a month of filings, is more coherent than the headlines suggest, and the coherence is what makes it consequential.
In late June, the company paused purchases and announced a Digital Credit Capital Framework: a board-level policy requiring a defended US dollar reserve, a $1 billion repurchase program for its own preferred instruments, and, in the filing that broke a five-year taboo, authorization to sell up to $1.25 billion of Bitcoin to fund dividends and interest. The first week of July it used the authorization, selling 3,588 BTC for about $216 million, the sales that reduced holdings to 843,775. The following weeks it sold no coins and bought none, while the ATM kept running, $466.7 million raised one week, $263.5 million the next, with proceeds routed to the reserve, which reached $3.225 billion, roughly 20 months of dividend coverage. On-chain and market observers who had spent June recommending exactly this sequence, CryptoQuant’s analysts prominent among them, graded the company as having substantially adopted the advice: stop buying, rebuild cash, cover the dividends, survive the drawdown.
Read as treasury management, it is defensible, arguably overdue. Read as signal, it is seismic, and markets trade signal. The company that defined itself by never selling has sold; the founder who answered every drawdown with a purchase now posts teaser charts, “What’s next?”, over an unchanged holdings number; and the equity sales that once meant more Bitcoin per share now mean more cash per share, a phrase no one bought MSTR to hear. The stock’s behavior confirms the regime change: shares rose on the news of the extended pause, investors relieved by liquidity rather than excited by accumulation, which is how the market tells a growth story it has been reclassified as a survival story.
The sector downstream
Strategy’s reversal would matter less if Strategy were merely large. It matters because it is upstream of an entire corporate category’s logic, and the category is visibly straining.
The treasury-company playbook, raise capital at a premium to NAV, convert to crypto, let the premium compound, was licensed from Saylor by dozens of imitators across Bitcoin, Ethereum, Solana, and XRP, and the license’s fine print always contained the same clause: the model works while the premium exists. The premiums are gone sector-wide. Strategy’s own compression below 1 put it, in The Block’s phrasing, into a cohort of treasury companies whose premiums have sharply collapsed, and the cohort’s weaker members are already running the exit sequence. Capital B, the European Bitcoin treasury pioneer, executed a 10-for-1 reverse split to keep its collapsed shares presentable. MARA, the miner whose treasury ambitions once rivaled Strategy’s accumulation, sold 15,133 BTC in March, over a billion dollars of coins, to deleverage. For context, crypto.news has also covered what miners did with the same drawdown. The marginal DAT is no longer a bid under the market; arithmetic says the marginal DAT is a seller, and the sector’s aggregate holdings, accumulated as a one-way flow through 2024 and 2025, now sit as overhang whose release schedule depends on dividend calendars and covenant math rather than conviction.
This is the channel through which one company’s capital framework becomes everyone’s market structure. Strategy alone holds roughly 4% of Bitcoin’s supply; the treasury sector collectively holds multiples of every month’s miner issuance; and the sector’s transition from programmatic buyer to conditional seller changes the demand curve Bitcoin’s price discovery runs on, at exactly the moment ETF flows have their own four-week negative streak. That is the other institutional bid and its own streak. The bull era’s reflexive loop, treasury buying lifts price, lifting premiums, funding more buying, ran in reverse for the first time this month, and the reverse loop has its own reflexivity: falling prices compress premiums, forcing sales, pressing prices. Strategy’s $3.2 billion reserve is, among other things, a firewall against its own participation in that cascade. The imitators without firewalls are the ones to watch.
The preferred stack, unpacked
The instrument class actually driving the reversal deserves its own examination, because the preferred complex is where Strategy’s engineering was boldest and where the constraint now binds.
Across 2025 the company built a capital stack unlike anything else in public markets: perpetual preferred securities, STRK, STRF, STRC among them, sold in the billions to buyers who wanted contractual yield adjacent to a Bitcoin balance sheet. The design logic was elegant. Preferreds raised money without diluting common shareholders’ Bitcoin per share, their dividends were modest against the scale of the coin position, and in the model’s happy path the common-stock premium machine would always fund them incidentally. The instruments effectively sold volatility insurance to income investors with the Bitcoin stack as collateral, and demand was strong enough that the company kept issuing.
The drawdown converted that elegance into the binding constraint, through three compounding mechanics. First, the obligations are cash and perpetual: unlike the coin position, which can wait out any winter, the dividends arrive monthly and quarterly regardless of price, which is how a company with $50 billion in Bitcoin found itself selling coins to make payments measured in hundreds of millions. Second, the instruments themselves broke: STRC, designed to trade near $100, collapsed into the seventies as Bitcoin fell, and the company’s response, raising the dividend rate 50 basis points to 12% and declaring a $99-100 price objective, defends the instrument’s credibility at the direct cost of enlarging the very obligations straining the model. A 12% perpetual coupon is distressed-issuer pricing, and the market can read it. Third, the stack inverted the shareholder hierarchy the flywheel depended on: with mNAV below 1, ATM sales dilute common holders to fund preferred payments, transferring value up the capital structure, the precise opposite of the accretion story that justified every prior raise.
The $1 billion repurchase program is the sophisticated response, and it is worth understanding why. With the preferreds trading far below par, buying them back retires a dollar of perpetual obligation for seventy-odd cents, mathematically the best Bitcoin-per-share trade available to the company, better than buying Bitcoin, at current prices. That the board authorized it is the clearest internal signal in any filing this month: management’s own arithmetic now ranks extinguishing its yield promises above accumulating its founding asset. For the treasury sector downstream, the lesson is sharper still, because the imitators copied the preferred playbook late, at smaller scale, with thinner reserves, and their versions of STRC are breaking without a $3 billion firewall behind them. The era’s defining trade was long Bitcoin, funded by promises. The promises are now the position, and Strategy, first into the trade, is first to show what managing out of it looks like.
The two readings, and the test between them
The bull and bear readings of the reversal are both fully available in the same filings, which is what makes the next quarter informative.
The disciplined-pause reading: this is what maturity looks like. The company saw the mNAV constraint, stopped dilutive purchases exactly as its own math demanded, funded twenty months of obligations, and built optionality, a $3.2 billion war chest that can resume buying at will, repurchase discounted preferreds at will, or simply wait. Nothing was liquidated beyond dividend needs; 843,775 BTC remains the largest corporate position on earth, untouched through a 50% drawdown that has bankrupted lesser structures. On this reading, Saylor’s teaser posts are honest: the machine is idling, not broken, and the resumption of purchases into a recovering market, funded by a reserve rather than dilution, would be the strongest possible refutation of the death narrative. The stock rising on pause news supports it; the market prefers a solvent accumulator to a compulsive one.
The flywheel-reversal reading: the model’s critics spent five years describing exactly this sequence, and it is now running on schedule. The premium was the product; it is gone. The dividends were the leverage; they now consume coin sales. The ATM was the engine; it now funds the dividend firewall, meaning new shareholders are diluted to pay old preferred holders, a structure with an uncomfortable genealogy. And the $1.25 billion sale authorization, only $216 million used, is the tell: the company has priced the scenario where it sells nine figures more, and a renewed leg down in Bitcoin, pressing the reserve’s 20-month runway against a 12% dividend rate, converts authorization into obligation. On this reading, the largest holder has quietly become the market’s most predictable future seller, and every treasury company below it in the capital structure follows the same gradient with less cushion.
The test between the readings is legible in advance. Watch whether purchases resume, and how they are funded: reserve-funded buying validates the pause; continued cash hoarding through any recovery says the premium era is understood internally to be over. Watch the mNAV line against 1, the boundary that decides whether the ATM builds or destroys value. Watch the preferred complex, STRC’s price against its defended $99-100 objective and any further rate increases, the dividend machinery is now the model’s binding constraint, and its cost curve is public. And watch the sale authorization’s utilization in each Monday filing, because the difference between a treasury program and a distribution program is, from here, a single 8-K. For five years the Sunday chart meant the same thing every week. The discipline now is reading what its absence means, and the honest answer is: the largest experiment in corporate Bitcoin ownership has entered the phase its design never specified, the one where the flywheel must prove it can stop without rolling downhill.
The historical rhyme worth logging before the FAQ: this is not the first time a dominant, levered accumulator defined an asset’s market structure, and the precedents are not comforting or damning so much as instructive about what to watch. The gold market of the late 1990s was shaped for years by central banks that had accumulated for decades becoming coordinated sellers, and the eventual solution was not abstinence but the Washington Agreement, a disclosed schedule that let the market price the supply instead of fearing it. Grayscale’s GBTC played the Strategy role of the prior crypto cycle, the one-way accumulation vehicle whose premium was the trade, and its premium’s collapse into a discount produced two years of overhang, arbitrage blowups, and, ultimately, conversion into an ETF that let the trapped supply exit in an orderly line. The pattern across both: concentrated positions built on premium mechanics do not unwind quietly by choice, they unwind on a schedule the market forces, and the difference between a crisis and a transition is disclosure. By that standard, Strategy’s current posture, weekly 8-Ks, a published sale authorization with a hard ceiling, a framework document stating the priority order of reserve, repurchases, and coins, is the Washington Agreement version of the problem and not the GBTC version: the supply risk is real, sized, and on a calendar anyone can read. Whether that discipline survives another 30% drawdown is the open question, but the market’s relatively calm digestion of the first corporate Bitcoin sales in the company’s history suggests the disclosure is doing its work. Panic needs surprise, and the filings have removed most of it. For market readers, crypto.news has explained reading positioning around MSTR and BTC and the macro regime pressing on the model.
Frequently asked questions
How long has Strategy gone without buying Bitcoin?
Four consecutive weeks without increasing its position as of the July 20 filing, the longest stretch in two years: two weeks that included selling 3,588 BTC for roughly $216 million to fund dividends, followed by two weeks of neither buying nor selling. Holdings have been unchanged at 843,775 BTC since the sales, with the last purchase disclosed in the week ending June 22.
Why did the company stop buying?
Arithmetic. MSTR’s enterprise value fell below the value of its Bitcoin in late June, with mNAV under 1, which makes issuing shares to buy coins dilutive to Bitcoin per share, the metric the entire model maximizes. Simultaneously, cash dividend obligations on its preferred stock complex grew while reserves had thinned, prompting a board framework requiring a defended dollar reserve before further accumulation.
Is Strategy actually selling Bitcoin now?
It has, in a limited and disclosed way. A June 29 filing authorized selling up to $1.25 billion of Bitcoin to fund preferred dividends and interest, and the company sold 3,588 BTC for about $216 million in early July under that authorization. No further sales have been disclosed since, and the remaining authorization functions as a standing liquidity mechanism the market now monitors weekly.
Where is the money from stock sales going?
Into cash. Strategy raised $466.7 million and $263.5 million in consecutive weeks through its at-the-market program, directing proceeds to a US dollar reserve that reached about $3.2 billion, roughly 20 months of dividend coverage. Under the new Digital Credit Capital Framework, the reserve and a $1 billion preferred-repurchase program take priority over Bitcoin accumulation while the mNAV discount persists.
What is mNAV and why does it matter so much?
Multiple to net asset value: the company’s market value, in enterprise form including debt and preferred stock minus cash, divided by the value of its Bitcoin. Above 1, issuing stock to buy coins adds Bitcoin per share and the flywheel compounds; below 1, the same transaction dilutes. Strategy’s enterprise mNAV crossed below 1 on June 27 for the first time, which is the single number behind the strategy shift.
How does this affect the broader treasury-company sector?
Structurally. Strategy invented the template dozens of companies copied, and its shift coincides with sector-wide premium compression: Capital B executed a 10-for-1 reverse split, MARA sold 15,133 BTC to deleverage, and the marginal treasury company has moved from programmatic buyer to conditional seller. A sector that was a reliable bid under Bitcoin now represents supply whose release depends on dividend calendars and covenants.
Is Strategy at risk of forced large-scale selling?
Not imminently, on disclosed numbers. The $3.2 billion reserve covers roughly 20 months of dividends, sales to date total $216 million against the largest corporate Bitcoin position in existence, and the company retains repurchase and financing options. The risk scenario is a prolonged further drawdown that erodes the reserve while the 12% STRC rate and other obligations persist, converting the standing sale authorization into a recurring funding tool.
What signals should investors watch next?
Four, all public. Whether and how purchases resume, with reserve-funded buying signaling a validated pause. The mNAV line against 1, which governs whether share issuance creates or destroys value. The preferred complex’s health, particularly STRC’s price against the company’s stated $99-100 objective and any dividend-rate changes. And each Monday 8-K’s disclosure of Bitcoin sales under the $1.25 billion authorization. This is not investment advice.
Disclaimer: This article is for information and educational purposes only and does not constitute financial or investment advice. It describes corporate actions and market conditions that change quickly, and holdings, prices, and policies cited reflect disclosures available at the time of writing. Nothing here is a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security or asset. Always do your own research. Information is accurate as of July 21, 2026.
Cardano wallet SecondFi is winding down after attackers exploited a flaw in its transaction signing software to steal 16.1 million ADA, worth roughly $2.4 million, from 374 wallets.
The service, which replaced EMURGO’s Yoroi wallet, said it will not resume normal operations despite patching the vulnerability.and at the time securing 129 million ADA before attackers could reach the funds.
The flaw allowed attackers to derive private key material from transaction data visible on the Cardano blockchain, SecondFi said. The Cardano network itself was not compromised, and hardware wallet users were not affected.
Groom Lake, the blockchain intelligence firm hired by EMURGO, found that the main attacker was sophisticated and well-funded. Some indicators point to North Korea’s Lazarus Group, though no attribution has been confirmed, the firm said.
A separate attacker targeted another set of wallets during the same period.
SecondFi expects to release wallet export tools in early August and a zero-knowledge recovery portal later that month. EMURGO has funded an asset recovery wallet, but no firm distribution date has been given.
The attacker behind the $6 million Summer.fi exploit has begun laundering the stolen funds, moving roughly $1.35 million in DAI through Tornado Cash, the sanctioned crypto mixer, according to Summer.fi's own post-mortem of the July 6 attack. Summer.fi, the front-end for the Lazy Summer Protocol,… Read the full story at The Defiant
Midnight’s NIGHT token staged a sharp recovery after crashing to an all-time low following a bridge exploit earlier this week, with Charles Hoskinson using the incident to make a broader case for rethinking crypto security from the ground up.
NIGHT fell roughly 43% after 290 million tokens were stolen and dumped through a legacy Wanchain bridge on the Binance-Cardano corridor. The token has since bounced nearly 19% in 24 hours, trading around $0.022. Hoskinson pushed back at coverage that focused only on the crash. “Magically, they forget to mention the rebound,” he posted on X.
Hoskinson described the hack as a “case of the Mondays” in an interview with CoinDesk but did acknowledge its seriousness in the broader context.
“All software is under this enormous assault,” he said, pointing to a surge in Linux kernel vulnerabilities he attributed to AI-powered exploit discovery. He was direct about the limits of even well-built systems: “That’s like being 90% resistant to a deadly disease. If you’re exposed to it enough, eventually you still catch the disease.”
Matt Damon plays a king on screen. Off-screen, he holds a $33.8 million real estate portfolio. “The Odyssey” star built it with three homes in Brooklyn, Bedford, and West Hollywood.
Christopher Nolan’s film earned $264 million in its opening weekend, his biggest debut ever. Then Elon Musk vowed to make a rival AI version. All eyes are back on its star.
Inside Matt Damon’s Investment Portfolio
Start in Brooklyn. Damon paid $16.7 million in 2018 for a penthouse at The Standish in Brooklyn Heights. No home in the borough had ever sold for a higher price. The six-bedroom triplex spans 6,200 square feet atop a converted 1903 hotel.
Next came the countryside. In June 2022, he bought a 13-acre estate in Bedford, New York, for $8.5 million. The deal ran through an LLC that shares an address with Pearl Street Films, the studio he owns with Ben Affleck. The home comes with a saltwater pool, tennis court, and antique barn.
The last piece is small on purpose. Damon sold his 13,500-square-foot Los Angeles mansion for roughly $18 million in 2021. Three years later, he bought a 2,900-square-foot condo at 8899 Beverly in West Hollywood for $8.6 million. That cut his Los Angeles footprint by nearly 80%.
All this wealth still sits off-chain, even as real-world asset tokenization moves into housing.
Odyssey Buzz Meets Musk’s AI Challenge
So where are the stocks, the gold, the coins? Nowhere public. Damon has never disclosed holdings in any of them, and actors file no ownership records. Property deeds are his only visible paper trail.
His crypto ties are about charity, not bags. He fronted Crypto.com’s “Fortune Favors the Brave” ad in 2021, weeks before Bitcoin peaked that cycle.
He later told the Associated Press he gave his entire fee to Water.org, his clean water charity. Crypto.com then donated $1 million on top.
In June, his Ripple Swell 2026 appearance promoted a water aid campaign with Water.org, funded through Ripple’s RLUSD stablecoin.
Now Musk has entered the story. On Wednesday, he said Grok Imagine, xAI’s video tool, will make a full-length AI Odyssey before 2026 ends. He calls it a historically accurate answer to Nolan’s reported $250 million film, whose casting he has attacked.
Damon’s playbook is simple. Fewer homes, each with a clear job. Musk’s AI feud keeps the film in the news, and its star’s money right beside it.
The post Odyssey Actor Matt Damon’s Investment Portfolio Revealed appeared first on BeInCrypto.
That shift is already beginning. Robinhood launched AI-powered investing tools in May that let agents trade stocks and make purchases for users. CEO Vlad Tenev has said AI agents will eventually rival the capabilities of human traders, while OpenAI and Anthropic are racing to build increasingly autonomous systems that can navigate software and complete complex tasks on their own.
For Kaul, those agents introduce a problem that today’s payment systems weren’t built to solve.
Many transactions between AI agents could be worth only fractions of a cent, such as paying for an API call, a second of computing power or access to a dataset. Traditional payment networks become expensive when fees cost more than the transaction itself.
That’s where Kaul believes blockchains come in.
She argued public blockchain networks are better suited to machine-to-machine payments because they offer programmable transactions, cryptographic identity and near-instant settlement. Instead of relying on banks or card networks, AI agents could hold digital assets and pay one another directly over blockchain rails.
If that happens at scale, demand for blockchain networks could grow alongside AI adoption.
Since agents would need native cryptocurrencies to pay network fees, Kaul argued rising transaction volumes could increase demand for those tokens while generating more revenue for developer incentives, network security and decentralized applications.
Federal prosecutors filed five civil forfeiture complaints seeking more than $25 million in cryptocurrency that investigators say came from international romance and investment scams targeting people in the U.S. and Canada.
The complaints, filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, stem from separate Secret Service investigations.
Agents traced funds through hundreds of wallet addresses and frozen crypto linked to more than 270 suspected investment scam transactions, more than 200 romance scam victims and several victims in the Washington area, according to the U.S. Attorney’s Office.
The two largest cases seek about $12.1 million tied to online romance schemes and $10.4 million linked to fraudulent investment platforms. Another three complaints seek roughly $1.23 million, $2.39 million and $285,000.
In one case, scammers cut off contact after a victim tried to withdraw money from what appeared to be a crypto investment account. In another, fraudsters contacted someone who had already lost money and claimed they could recover it for a fee in what’s known as a recovery scam.
The cases are part of the Scam Center Strike Force, which launched in November 2025. The U.S. Attorney’s Office said the task force has recovered more than $800 million.
Crypto World
4 Important Binance Announcements Concerning Tron (TRX), Zcash (ZEC), and Other Alts: Details
The world’s largest cryptocurrency exchange will temporarily suspend certain services later this month.
Additionally, it will delist numerous trading pairs “to protect users and maintain a high-quality trading market.”
The Upcoming Disruptions
Binance will perform a wallet maintenance for the Tron Network on July 23, and to support the process, it will briefly pause TRX deposits and withdrawals. The operation is expected to take about one hour, following which everything should resume normally. In addition, the exchange will support an upcoming Zcash hard fork and, as a result, temporarily suspend ZEC deposits and withdrawals.
“The network upgrade and hard fork will take place at block height 3,428,143, or approximately 2026-07-28 13:00 (UTC),” the disclosure reads.
In both cases, token trading will not be impacted, while Binance promised to handle all technical requirements involving users.
Such efforts are quite common and usually cause no serious implications for clients. Less than a month ago, Binance briefly halted deposits and withdrawals on the Bitcoin (BTC) network to perform similar wallet maintenance.
Prior to that, it took similar actions to support improvements across various ecosystems, including Ethereum (ETH), Cardano (ADA), and more. There haven’t been reports or complaints of major issues, and everything was restored promptly.
The Other Updates
Binance is known for closely monitoring all services and digital assets listed on its platform to ensure they meet industry standards, such as team commitment, development activity, trading volume, liquidity, network stability, and more. Based on its latest review, it decided to remove the spot trading pairs: ACX/USDC, ALGO/BTC, CVC/USDC, LPT/USDC, ONG/BTC, RVN/USDC, and XRP/BNB. The actual delisting is scheduled for July 24.
Meanwhile, the same action will apply to several pairs from the Margin section on July 24. Those include the cross margin pairs CYBER/USDC, DOLO/USDC, PIXEL/USDC, and STEEM/USDC, as well as the isolated margin pairs DOLO/USDC, PIXEL/USDC, and STEEM/USDC.
The announcements have not triggered a negative price impact for the involved cryptocurrencies. However, it is a completely different story when Binance terminates all services with a certain digital asset. Last month, it delisted Alchemix (ALCX), Ardor (ARDR), NFPrompt Token (NFP), and Marlin (POND), causing double-digit collapses for the affected ones. A very similar thing was observed at the start of June when it said goodbye to Contentos (COS), Dar Open Network (D), Highstreet (HIGH), and MOBOX (MBOX).
The post 4 Important Binance Announcements Concerning Tron (TRX), Zcash (ZEC), and Other Alts: Details appeared first on CryptoPotato.
The digital euro is one of Europe’s most contentious financial projects.
Supporters see it as a way to preserve the bloc’s monetary sovereignty, reduce its reliance on foreign payment providers, and ensure central bank money survives in an online economy dominated by USD stablecoins.
Critics, however, argue the digital euro could be a way for a supranational organization to surveil — and in certain circumstances, even control — the population of Europe.
The official view is that: “The digital euro will reduce Europe’s excessive dependence on non-European providers. It will ensure that Europeans can pay with their money — the sovereign money issued by their central bank — in the digital economy,” said Piero Cipollone, member of the executive board of the European Central Bank (ECB).
The alternative perspective is that the Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) may curtail the freedom of citizens to spend money how they wish.
“These are the 8 most dangerous words if you care about freedom: “The digital euro is here to protect Europeans,” said former Deutsche Bank managing director Pius Sprenger.
“This is how they will be able to control EVERY euro you spend. Goodbye money. The ECB will decide how much digital money you can have,” said José Vizner, a Spanish financial commentator.
So who’s right? The suited Brussels bureaucrats who seem to get a kick out of reading your private messages or the tinfoil hat adjacent cypherpunks who want to separate money and state?
What is the digital euro?
The digital euro is a proposed digital form of the euro that would be issued by the ECB, making it a digital form of central bank money, or CBDC.
The term “CBDC” tends to raise the hairs on the back of the necks of privacy-loving crypto folk, invoking 1984-style vibes of government overreach and surveillance.
President Donald Trump signed an executive order to ban CBDCs from the US in January, citing threats to the financial system, individual privacy and the country’s sovereignty. A ban until 2030 was formalized more recently in housing bill legislation. Despite this, the ECB says they’ll do just fine for Europe.
Related: US CBDC ban to go into effect without Trump signoff on housing bill
It argues the digital euro would give people living in the euro zone another way to make everyday transactions with central bank money as payments move increasingly online; and that it will complement, rather than replace, physical banknotes and coins.
Not everyone is sold on the benefits of the digital euro. Source: Pius the Banker
“The main reason for issuing a digital euro is to preserve the benefits of cash in the digital era,” Cipellone said in an interview on July 14.
That’s nice, except that one of the major benefits of banknotes that is they can be tracked, traced and frozen at will, as Vizner pointed out. “They promise privacy… but it’s money that’s trackable by design.”
Why does Europe want one?
The ECB obviously isn’t talking up the benefits of spying on everyday payments. Instead, officials argue that as cash use declines, Europe risks becoming more reliant on private or overseas-operated payment systems like Visa or Mastercard.
Some policymakers have expressed concern that the continent lacks control over its critical payment infrastructure, with ECB President Christine Lagarde saying in 2025:
“The entire infrastructure mechanism that allows for payment, credit and debit, is not a European solution… We need to make sure there is a European offer, just in case.”
Consumer groups such as the European Consumer Organization (BEUC) have also highlighted potential benefits for users.
Deputy head of communications, Andrew Canning, told Cointelegraph that the digital euro could provide consumers with a “secure and inclusive” payment option that complements existing solutions, particularly for people who face barriers accessing digital payments.
Related: South Korea eyes September launch for second phase of CBDC pilot: Report
Yet critics argue that the digital euro would give governments and central banks control over how citizens can spend money.
These fears are not theoretical, even in Western democracies. During Canada’s 2022 Freedom Convoy protests, authorities ordered banks, crowdfunding platforms and other financial institutions to freeze accounts linked to the blockades.
Why do we need a digital euro? Source: ECB
Efrat Fenigson, a tech entrepreneur and privacy advocate, said that the digital euro could become “the infrastructure for programmable money, programmable identity and programmable behavior,” warning that “freedom doesn’t disappear overnight. It disappears one permission at a time.”
Patrick Schueffel, a professor of banking and finance at the Fribourg School of Management, also warned that CBDCs could significantly expand governments’ ability to monitor financial activity.
Are there safeguards?
The EU’s own privacy watchdogs have said the project needs strong safeguards, with both the Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) and the European Data Protection Board (EDPB) saying a high level of privacy and data protection is essential for the digital euro to gain public trust.
The ECB’s digital euro privacy materials assure skeptics that offline payments will exist to enable ‘cash-like’ privacy and insist that the bank will not see personal transaction data.
Canning told Cointelegraph that the BEUC is “currently happy” with the proposal and that “we trust that consumer safeguards are protected in the final negotiations between EU lawmakers.”
However, the ECB’s arguments may not be enough to persuade the doubters.
How does the digital euro work?
Unlike privately issued stablecoins like Tether or USDC, which are denominated in US dollars, the digital euro would be denominated in euros and issued by the central bank. Consumers would still access it through their regular bank or payment provider.
Unlike physical cash, which people hold directly in their wallets, the digital euro would be accessed through electronic wallets and used to make payments in stores, online, or from wallet to wallet.
The underlying money would remain a liability of the ECB rather than a commercial bank, which supporters say would give it the same public backing as cash rather than being a claim on a commercial bank’s deposits.
Related: Bank of England governor denies Farage lobbying swayed CBDC policy: Report
Unusual bedfellows: Crypto and the banks
Crypto and privacy advocates have an unusual ally in the fight against the digital euro, as parts of the banking industry isn’t too keen on it either.
They worry a shift to central bank digital euros would reduce bank deposits, forcing them to rethink loans to businesses and consumers.
Lorenzo Bini Smaghi, an Italian economist and banker who served on the executive board of the ECB from 2005 to 2011, said, “There is a high risk of financial instability, with strong repercussions for the real economy.”
The ECB argues that the design choices have been taken to “minimize any potential risks” to the banking sector. Users would be limited to holding a small amount of digital euros in their wallets at any time to “prevent excessive outflows of bank deposits,” and “as with cash in your wallet, no interest would be paid on digital euro holdings.”
Estimated bank deposit outflows by holding limits. Source: ECB
How much will it cost?
The cost of implementing a digital euro has become a bone of contention among critics, as the ECB estimates that it will run to around 1.3 billion euros (approximately $1.5 billion) in investment, with ongoing operating costs of around €320 million ($370 million) annually.
Commercial banks and other payment providers face steep costs integrating the digital euro into their services. The ECB expects implementation costs for the banking sector of between $4.6 billion and $6.9 billion.
When is it coming?
After years of discussions, lawmakers across the European Parliament, EU member states and the European Commission have begun negotiations on the final legislation for the digital euro, and aim to reach an agreement within the next six months.
Cipollone said in an interview on July 13:
“We hope the text will be finalized by the end of the year, at which point we’ll be in a position to take a decision on the future issuance of the digital euro.”
The road to a digital euro. Source: Cointelegraph
If that legislation goes through, the next move will be up to the ECB’s Governing Council, which will decide whether to launch the digital euro sometime in 2027. Europeans are unlikely to encounter it in their everyday lives before 2029, if it is approved at all.
Has this been tried before?
More than 100 countries started exploring CBDCs a few years ago, with most abandoning the idea or shifting to a wholesale model, rather than a retail currency. The few CBDCs in production have not been widely adopted.
China began piloting its digital yuan, or e-CNY, in 2019, later rolling it out across the country. Even though it has processed trillions of yuan in transactions, most Chinese consumers still prefer using familiar payment apps such as Alipay and WeChat Pay.
The Bahamas Sand Dollar project. Source: IMF
The Bahamas became the first country to roll out a nationwide retail CBDC when it launched the Sand Dollar in 2020. While the project was intended to improve financial inclusion, adoption was slower than many hoped, prompting authorities to push for wider distribution through commercial banks.
Elsewhere, Nigeria’s eNaira also struggled to gain traction after its 2021 launch despite strong government support, and Brazil’s central bank shut down its Drex CBDC platform in 2025, citing cost and privacy concerns.
As the Bank for International Settlements concluded in 2023, “a retail CBDC is a complex undertaking, and not only for the central banks.”
Magazine: The British Virgin Islands are a top crypto hub no one ever talks about. Here’s why
Cointelegraph publishes long-form journalism, analysis and narrative reporting produced by Cointelegraph’s in-house editorial team with subject-matter expertise. All articles are edited and reviewed by Cointelegraph editors in line with our editorial standards. Content published in here does not constitute financial, legal or investment advice. Readers should conduct their own research and consult qualified professionals where appropriate. Cointelegraph maintains full editorial independence.
A 20-year-old's cryptocurrency wallet processed more than $122.5 million in suspected romance-scam proceeds over 10 months, Interpol said, after Thai police made two arrests tied to a cross-chain laundering scheme uncovered during a global crackdown. The case surfaced from Operation First Light… Read the full story at The Defiant
Bitcoin buyers appear to be absorbing sell pressure more effectively around the $65,000 area, according to analysis tied to exchange flow data. The signal comes after Binance posted its largest single-day net outflow in nearly two years, with more BTC leaving the platform than entering.
Onchain analytics firm CryptoQuant highlighted that Binance withdrawals have recently been running ahead of deposits—an environment traders often watch for because it can indicate reduced immediate supply on the exchange order book. Still, analysts caution that exchange outflows alone do not confirm a fresh, sustainable uptrend.
Key takeaways
- CryptoQuant data shows Binance daily netflows have oscillated between inflows and outflows, with a notable outflow spike on Tuesday.
- More than 9,000 BTC net left Binance in a single day, the largest tally since November 2024, suggesting significant movement toward self-custody.
- Analysts frame the latest pattern as improved “absorption” near $65,000–$66,000 rather than immediate proof of a new rally.
- US spot Bitcoin ETF flows remain net positive, pointing to ongoing institutional demand even as spot market momentum appears uneven.
Binance’s outflow spike draws attention
A CryptoQuant research note released Wednesday focused on Binance’s spot exchange balances, showing that daily BTC withdrawals are outpacing inflows. The takeaway is that short-term pressure from supply moving onto Binance appears to be easing—at least on the days where net outflows dominate.
CryptoQuant contributor Rei Researcher wrote that this pattern typically reflects reduced urgency to send BTC to the exchange “for potential selling.” In other words, when a large exchange sees net withdrawals, it often suggests sellers are not adding to immediate market liquidity at that moment.
The broader context from CryptoQuant is that Binance netflows have been switching signs—turning positive and negative—after a stretch of positive days that ended in early June. One day, however, stands out: on Tuesday, Binance recorded a net outflow of more than 9,000 BTC, which CryptoQuant described as the largest single-day figure since November 2024.
Ruga Research, another CryptoQuant contributor, argued that outsized outflows generally point to participants moving “serious volume” into self-custody. In a separate post, he emphasized that coins leaving an exchange are less likely to be sold directly into the order book, at least in the near term.
“When outflows hit this size, someone is moving serious volume into self-custody. Coins off exchanges are coins that won’t be sold into the order book,” Ruga Research said in that post.
Ruga also noted that on rolling 30-day time frames, netflows continue to repeat a fluctuation pattern and that sharp spikes can still reverse. His warning reflects a key nuance investors often overlook: exchange flow metrics can shift quickly, and a single dramatic day does not automatically define the next trend.
“Can this one fail? Absolutely. Momentum has been indecisive around the zero line for two weeks. It hasn’t committed. And what happens next, honestly, nobody knows,” he wrote, referring to mixed netflow days.
Absorption improves, but the trend still needs confirmation
Rei Researcher stopped short of claiming the outflow data by itself signals a durable new bull phase. Instead, he pointed to a more subtle implication: the presence of negative netflow while BTC trades around $65,000–$66,000 suggests buyers are doing a better job absorbing whatever supply remains in the system compared with an earlier weak period.
In his assessment, the key distinction is between “absorption” and a confirmed uptrend. Negative netflow can reduce exchange liquidity, but price still depends on spot demand, traded volume, and the market’s ability to maintain a stable structure.
“However, negative netflow does not automatically confirm a new uptrend. It needs to be accompanied by spot demand, volume, and a more stable price structure,” Rei Researcher said.
This framing matters because BTC’s reaction has been relatively range-bound compared to the momentum traders typically look for when a sustained move begins. If exchange outflows are rising but price remains choppy, the market may be transitioning into a steadier equilibrium rather than launching immediately into a higher trajectory.
ETF inflows remain a supportive counterweight
While exchange flow data is one part of the picture, ETF activity is another. Earlier coverage from Cointelegraph noted that consensus expectations for a full bull-market rebound have been constrained by a perceived lack of consistent spot demand. In that context, derivatives-related improvement has been easier to observe than a corresponding surge in spot buying.
Cointelegraph previously reported that net inflows into US spot Bitcoin ETFs suggest a continuation of institutional interest. CryptoQuant’s flow-focused analysis aligns with that broader narrative: even if the spot market’s immediate impulse is inconsistent, larger investors and structured products can help sustain demand.
In the current setup described by CryptoQuant and referenced by Cointelegraph, the most relevant tension is this: Binance outflows may be reducing available supply on exchanges, but the market still needs clear evidence that spot buyers are expanding participation rather than simply absorbing intermittent supply.
What to watch next for traders and long-term holders
For readers tracking whether this move becomes meaningful, the immediate question is whether Binance netflows keep favoring withdrawals and whether spot market behavior follows through. CryptoQuant contributors themselves underscored that netflow momentum has been mixed and that outflow spikes can fail. The next confirmations to monitor are steadier spot demand and improved price structure around the $65,000–$66,000 band, alongside continued net positive ETF inflows that could support broader risk appetite.
Co Antrim man denies assisting offenders after death of Colin Crawley
SecondFi to shut down after $2.4 million ADA wallet theft
McGlynn demands more hunger and bravery from Falkirk
-
NewsBeat6 days agoLondon Mayor Sadiq Khan handed a peerage by Keir Starmer alongside 15 other Labour figures… just days before the PM leaves No10
-
Fashion5 days agoWeekend Open Thread – Corporette.com
-
Politics4 days agoThe House | The City of London can help the new chancellor deliver growth in every postcode
-
Crypto World5 days agoTwo July Windows Left: The CLARITY Act’s Senate Fight and What Failure Means
-
Crypto World7 days agoCFTC blocks Kalshi from unwinding Michigan trades after court order
-
Crypto World4 days agoRipple Payments Joins MiCA With 14 Firms, Does It Mean Anything For XRP?
-
Business7 days agoNvidia Stock Slips After Big Tuesday Rally as Huang Confirms Vera Rubin Chip Is Now in Production Today
-
Politics3 days agoDemocrats look to World Cup watch parties to register thousands of voters
-
Entertainment7 days agoDisney’s Most Ambitious Failed Star Wars Attraction Is Coming to SDCC
-
Crypto World5 days agoRipple wins EU-wide access as ESMA adds it to MiCA register
-
Crypto World1 day agoGrayscale Files For Worldcoin ETF, WLD Registers Sharp Rise
-
Crypto World6 days agoInjective Submits SEC Transfer-Agent Registration to Onchain Ownership Records
-
Business6 days agoPalantir Shares Rise After Expanded Nvidia Partnership and Fresh Analyst Upgrades Ahead of Earnings Day
-
Tech2 days agoSail Virtually Aboard The “Itanic” With IA-64 Emulator
-
Tech1 day agoTurtle Beach Command Series KB7 review: a nifty screen-equipped gaming keyboard
-
NewsBeat2 days agoUnregistered fitter used Gas Safe logo on business flyers
-
NewsBeat5 days agoRegistration is now open for March for Men with Kev 2026
-
Sports7 days agoNew Cornerback Enters Vikings Trade Rumor Mill
-
Business11 hours agoNew Jersey voter registration controversy explained: How 6,600 noncitizens got on the rolls, and what happens next
-
News Videos5 days agoMoney | Class 12 Economics | CBSE Board Exam 2026-27
You must be logged in to post a comment Login