Crypto World
The Rise of Telehealth 'Pill Mills'
The elderly patient’s blood pressure had been dropping for weeks, and Chad Wittekind, his primary care provider, couldn’t figure out what was wrong. He had upped the dosage of one medication and added another, but couldn’t manage to regulate it.
The patient hadn’t reported taking any other new medications or supplements and hadn’t made any major recent lifestyle changes. So what could be causing the blood pressure irregularity?
It took a lot of questions and appointments to find the culprit: a drug he’d gotten through a telehealth website.
Like many other patients Wittekind has seen recently, this one had circumvented his primary care provider to get a drug over the Internet—in this case, an erectile-dysfunction medication. He’d gone to a website he came across online, filled out a form that a virtual health care provider quickly reviewed, and was sent the medication through the mail, but had been too embarrassed to tell Wittekind about the new addition to his regimen.
You might not think that Wittekind, a Columbus, Ohio-based provider who works in geriatrics, would be seeing many patients turn to the Internet to get drugs for conditions like erectile dysfunction, overweight, menopause, and depression. But the accessibility of sites like these and the ease of getting meds from them have made them an increasingly popular choice for Americans of all ages and incomes.
Here’s how it works: often after viewing an ad on social media, people click on little-known websites promising a fast and easy way to get medication for a specific condition. These sites accept credit cards, don’t take insurance, and don’t typically make you have a call with a doctor. Instead, you fill out a quick form about your medical history and current medications, and a medical provider you’ll never meet (and will probably never talk to) reviews the information within minutes to hours. If you qualify, they’ll write you a prescription—often a recurring one—and connect you to a pharmacy that ships the drug directly to your home.
Wittekind and other providers see this as a problem. They’re used to patients coming to them asking for some drug they’ve seen advertised on TV, but the fact that patients can now get these drugs elsewhere, without much screening, is worrying. Wittekind has had a patient receive ketamine tablets through a telehealth website, and another got a GLP-1 drug for weight-loss even though they had a BMI of 18.7, meaning they should have been too thin to qualify per U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) guidelines. Sometimes, patients will have side effects from medications, but when they follow up with the virtual doctor who prescribed them, they don’t get a helpful response.
Sites like these fall under the large umbrella of telehealth, which has unquestionably improved access to medical care, getting services to people who may not be able to easily or quickly find a doctor. It’s also made people much more comfortable seeking treatment for conditions that they might be embarrassed to bring up with their regular doctor, such as erectile dysfunction or hair loss. But telehealth has changed a lot since it started, when it usually referred to a video call with your doctor. Now, it includes hundreds of websites and the pharmacies they partner with—many of which are under-regulated.
“There’s no accountability, no follow-up if they do have a problem. Trying to get back with their provider is impossible, and then it becomes my problem,” Wittekind says. “There’s no oversight with most of these places. Yes, you’re improving access, but at what cost?”
Why telehealth sites are exploding
Elliot Tabibian started his first telehealth site when he was just 18 years old. You don’t need to be a doctor to do so; all you have to do is figure out a condition that people are seeking treatment for and market your website. Outside companies have popped up to help with the infrastructure side—connecting patients with doctors and pharmacies, for example, and ensuring that the website complies with various state and federal laws.
Tabibian says he got into telehealth after hearing about a friend who paid a website $200, had a 30-second doctor’s appointment by phone, and got a medical marijuana card. “I thought, ‘that seems pretty profitable, I should get in there,’ says Tabibian, who is now 22.
His first site prescribed medical marijuana; he also tried out sites that sold erectile dysfunction medicines and ones that allowed people to get doctor’s notes stating that they needed service animals. (He shut these sites down after competition got too tight, he says.) He now operates two telehealth sites, one of which helps people get medical exemptions so that they can tint their car windows. “Tired of Cops Taking Your Tint? See if you Qualify for a Medical Tint Exemption in Less than 10 Minutes!” the site reads. It claims to give customers a full refund if they do not get approved for an exemption.
Tabibian’s is one of hundreds, if not thousands, of telehealth sites that have proliferated in recent years. Though some of the first direct-to-consumer telehealth sites started operating before the pandemic, consumers really started embracing telehealth during it, when many insurers loosened restrictions to ensure more patients had access to care. This allowed medical care to be delivered at home to people who might not be able to travel to receive it elsewhere, expanding access. But what was meant to be a temporary measure became permanent as people grew accustomed to the convenience.
As more people sought out telehealth, entrepreneurs like Tabibian stepped in. They were enabled by companies forming networks of doctors that telehealth companies could contract with to provide services to patients, says Rebecca Gwilt, managing partner of Elevare Law, which consults with digital health care companies. An entrepreneur only has to create a website and market its services to get a telehealth company off the ground.
These sites became extremely popular once the first GLP-1s debuted in 2021 and immediately went into shortage. People wanted GLP-1s, and many either couldn’t get them or couldn’t afford them. Telehealth entrepreneurs saw an opportunity, Gwilt says. They partnered with a special type of pharmacy, called a compounding pharmacy, that mixed the active ingredients in GLP-1s and sold them for much less than the pharmaceutical companies.
These sites take advantage of several weaknesses in the American medical system. It is expensive and inconvenient to go to the doctor, and patients often need to wait more than a month for an appointment. Insurance is also dismal to deal with, and deductibles and pre-approvals can make getting medications a costly headache.
Those issues “created a gap that the compounding pharmacies and telehealth facilities were able to step into,” says Dr. Anjali Deshmukh, a pediatrician who is also a professor of health law at Seton Hall University. “They did not create the problem, but they are unquestionably profiting.”
One of the companies that helps entrepreneurs start their own telehealth sites is CareValidate. Co-founder Dr. Jiten Chhabra says he has seen a huge surge of people getting into telehealth—even those “who have no business in telehealth.” CareValidate is growing 20% month over month, he says, buoyed by investors and doctors interested in the idea of cash pay for medical care and specific medications.
“We’re about to see a telehealth site for everything—it’s going to be very niche,” he says. “It’s going to show up in your social media, and it’s going to be the easiest way to get your hyper-personalized health condition taken care of.”
There are now virtual companies where customers can get diagnoses and prescriptions for things like low testosterone, toenail fungus, and even fear of public speaking. Often, the medicines are prescribed on a recurring basis, creating a long-term demand for the services of the telehealth doctor—and revenue streams for investors. These sites have essentially changed the power dynamic between doctors and patients; now, it’s the patients demanding medications they’ve decided they need from online health care providers, rather than patients asking doctors about what’s best for them.
Investors see a huge upside because the sites are relatively cheap to launch and because they can turn a profit quickly—either by charging people for visits, selling medications at a markup, or both. Venture capitalists and private equity groups have put millions into telehealth startups, some of which have only a few employees. The size of the U.S. telehealth market was an estimated $28.3 billion in 2025, according to Grand View Research, and is projected to grow to $60.4 billion by 2033. The telehealth boom is concentrated in the U.S., where the high cost of medications and medical care has driven many consumers to telehealth sites; the market is not as strong in other countries.
The telehealth space is expected to further explode because of interest in peptides, the injectable compounds that wellness influencers have popularized. (Very few clinical studies prove that peptides are effective, aside from those for GLP-1s, one example of a peptide.) In a two-day July hearing, a FDA committee recommended that the agency allow specialty pharmacies to dispense six peptides; if approval is finalized, many patients are expected to get their prescriptions from telehealth sites.
Telehealth can be appealing to doctors who are burned out from long hours and negotiating with insurance companies. With telehealth, they can work from home and often avoid insurance altogether.
“The economics are good, the lifestyle is good,” says Chhabra.
The problems with this type of telehealth
The downsides of this direct-to-patient model are starting to become evident. Patients who claim they were prescribed medicines after a cursory online evaluation are filing lawsuits about unanticipated side effects. Several lawsuits allege problems with telehealth companies prescribing at-home ketamine, Adderall, and hair-loss drugs.
In a few cases, patients have died after receiving what their families allege were inadequate telehealth services. Some lawsuits are also accusing telehealth sites of pressuring doctors to act in ways that maximize profit, rather than patient health.
Research suggests that the level of care provided by some of these sites is sometimes poor. In one July 2026 study published in JAMA, a researcher attempted to obtain prescriptions from 49 telehealth websites and found that there was “limited clinician engagement” and that the sites sometimes issued prescriptions, often in as little as five minutes, despite patients not uploading required photos or following other rules of the sites. In some cases, the same clinician provided several different prescriptions for the same patient across multiple sites.
“What we found is really there’s not any sort of true engagement with a clinician,” says Dr. Reshma Ramachandran, a Yale professor and clinician and one of the authors of the study. “The motivation from these websites is just to prescribe and not necessarily provide health care in the sense of someone actually conveying to that patient the risks and benefits we need to be considering.”
Because so many sites compete to attract customers, experts say that some doctors are unlikely to turn down requests. Doctors sometimes have quotas of prescriptions they need to meet from the sites or get bonuses for meeting certain goals, says Ramachandran, who has friends who work for telehealth sites. A recent Senate investigation into a handful of telehealth sites found that 85%-100% of patients who interacted with a provider received prescriptions.
Many patients report that there’s little follow-up from the sites or the doctors they employ, making it difficult for people to know what to do if they develop side effects. Ramachandran, who works at a federally qualified health center for low-income patients, says she has patients coming in who turned to telehealth because insurance got too expensive and were seeking medication, got confused about the dosage they received, and had bad side effects from the medications they took.
“I think we’re undermining trust in the physician-patient relationship,” says Erin Fuse Brown, a professor of health services, policy and practice at the Brown University School of Public Health. She argues that telehealth sites are similar to “pill mills,” where the prescribers generate prescriptions if there is any conceivable reason to do so. “If you can just go to a website and get the drug you’re seeking after a cursory asynchronous questionnaire, it commercializes medicine in a way that’s a little bit dangerous.”
Few laws exist to regulate these sites, which have the ability to claim to just be platforms connecting patients and providers.
“There’s so much money to be made, and so many recent business school graduates running a start-up to get to the next big thing, that this aspect of telemedicine is getting way ahead of regulation, the law, and ethics,” says Arthur Caplan, a professor of bioethics at the NYU Grossman School of Medicine. “It’s like a gold rush.”
Ramachandran says that while telehealth sites may have started as efforts to increase access to care, many have since incorporated incentives for doctors who get patients to try additional medications or take specific costly tests. Her study found that some sites didn’t disclose that the GLP-1s they sold were compounded and made unsubstantiated efficacy claims.
“There are definitely digital health companies out there that you get concerned are worried about revenue rather than patient care,” says Dr. Suneer Chander, a co-founder of Air Physician Academy, which works to educate doctors about how to ethically enter telehealth. “That’s the sort of stuff we want doctors to understand before they get into digital health so that they can lead the industry, rather than be told what to do.”
Tabibian, for instance, says one of the doctors who works for his company has done 300 asynchronous visits a day, reviewing patients’ requests for medication. The doctor gets paid $20 per review and has made as much as $6,000 a day.
Asked if he was worried that 300 prescriptions per day was too many, Tabibian says that it’s up to the doctors to do their due diligence on what’s right for the patients. The way his company is set up, he says, he has no say in any medical decisions. “I’m a technology company. My job is just to connect the patient and physician,” he says. “Anything medical that goes on between the patient and the doctor is 100% the doctor’s responsibility.”
He does see other sites bend the rules, he says—prescribing testosterone for men whose levels don’t medically support a prescription, for instance. He got ketamine prescribed for himself online because he was interested in starting a ketamine site, and says that he only took half of what the doctor ordered and was so high he couldn’t get out of bed. “That’s just a huge liability,” he says.
Succeeding at telehealth is really about being good at marketing, he says, and people—especially young people—who know how to promote sites through social media can cash in. “It’s really been smooth sailing,” he says. “From what I’ve seen, there’s little to no enforcement in the field.”
Murky regulations
Few regulations guide what doctors can and can’t do via telehealth. Doctors, for instance, must meet what’s called the “standard of care,” meaning that they are expected to diagnose and treat the patient in the same way other qualified doctors would. But standard-of-care obligations are enforced by medical societies and professional associations, and few have taken steps to punish doctors for not meeting the standard of care through telehealth, says Caplan, the bioethics professor.
“I’ve tested the sites, and the longest it took me to get whatever pill was about 35 seconds,” he says. “There doesn’t seem to be a thorough medical exam happening.”
Instead, he says, doctors are prescribing medicine like antidepressants without talking to people to figure out why they might be depressed, or prescribing medications with serious side effects without much warning. Litigation often only comes after something bad has happened, like a death or other adverse event.
“I do worry about the fracturing of the medical system more broadly,” says Deshmukh, the Seton Hall professor. “I think having a relationship with a physician who understands you and knows your medical history and can make these decisions together is important.”
State medical boards could step in and discipline doctors who are providing substandard care through telehealth. But “the investigation capacity is really, really limited, and often they just don’t have the resources,” says Ramachandran, the Yale physician and professor.
There are not many existing federal laws that could effectively regulate telehealth, says Fuse Brown, the professor from Brown. A law called the anti-kickback statute makes it illegal to compensate someone to make referrals for something (for example, medications) paid for by a federal health care program. That would presumably prohibit telehealth sites who make money off of prescriptions from paying doctors to make those prescriptions. But the anti-kickback statute only applies to drugs prescribed through federal programs like Medicare and Medicaid, and many of these sites are cash pay, so the statute wouldn’t apply.
States could also investigate whether providers who work for these sites are being pressured or incentivized to prescribe more medicines, Fuse Brown, who adds that such pressure could potentially violate state laws.
Even without explicit pressure, telehealth providers know what patients expect of them. Wittekind, the geriatrics provider in Columbus, says he tried out working at a telehealth site after a company pitched him on setting his own hours and making some extra money. But one of his first patients was a man who wanted an oral hair-loss medication that can come with serious side effects, Wittekind says.
The patient already had hypertension, and Wittekind didn’t think the drug would be a good solution for him, so he turned down the patient’s request. Wittekind realized that his principles probably led to bad reviews for the telehealth site—the patient seemed “perplexed” by the denial—but he didn’t like the idea of prescribing powerful medications without much opportunity for follow-up. He ultimately decided telehealth wasn’t a good fit for him because of that pressure to give the patients what they want.
It wasn’t worth the extra money,” he says. But to many other clinicians, it is.
MSCI is considering a new methodology that could remove Strategy and Metaplanet from its Global Investable Market Indexes as early as the November 2026 Index Review.
Summary
- MSCI’s May simulation would delete Strategy, Metaplanet and Yellow Cake under proposed non-operating company screens.
- SharpLink would enter a watchlist because current constituents need two consecutive annual failures before removal.
- Companies failing the core screen become ineligible after triggering four of five financial ratio tests.
- Consultation closes September 30, with results due October 16 and possible November implementation by MSCI.
- MSCI abandoned its earlier crypto-only exclusion proposal in January and promised this broader company review.
A simulation using May data identified the two Bitcoin treasury companies and U.K. uranium investor Yellow Cake as the three existing constituents that would be deleted under the proposed rules.
The proposal remains a consultation, not a final index decision. MSCI’s announcement says feedback remains open through Sept. 30, with results expected by Oct. 16. Any methodology change would then be targeted for the November review. MSCI explicitly warns that the consultation “may or may not” result in the proposed changes.
MSCI proposal replaces the earlier crypto specific test
The current review is broader than MSCI’s earlier attempt to exclude digital asset treasury companies based largely on their crypto holdings. In January, the index provider abandoned that proposal for the February review after investors raised questions about whether a simple asset threshold could distinguish an operating company from an investment vehicle.
As previously reported, MSCI delayed its earlier crypto treasury exclusions and opted for a wider review. Strategy had opposed the previous 50% digital asset threshold, calling it “arbitrary” and arguing that companies holding large concentrations of other assets were not subjected to the same rule.
The new methodology addresses that criticism by applying financial tests across industries rather than singling out Bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies. The presence of Yellow Cake alongside Strategy and Metaplanet in MSCI’s simulated deletions illustrates the broader approach.
Strategy and Metaplanet fail MSCI’s simulated screen
MSCI proposes a two stage test. A company first passes automatically if operating assets exceed 50% of total assets. Companies falling below that level move to a second test based on operating asset intensity, expenses, operating cash flow, non-operating fair value changes and reliance on financing for asset accumulation.
An issuer would be treated as a non-operating company if it triggers at least four of those five flags. For existing constituents, MSCI proposes less restrictive thresholds and requires failure in two consecutive annual reviews before deletion. New candidates would need to fail only the latest review to become ineligible for addition.
Using May 2026 data, MSCI’s simulation would remove Strategy, with a free float adjusted market capitalization of $23.93 billion; Yellow Cake, at $1.81 billion; and Metaplanet, at $654 million. SharpLink, Center Laboratories and Lydia Holding would instead enter a public watchlist because the simulation found only one qualifying period of failure.
SharpLink’s inclusion is notable for the crypto treasury sector. The Nasdaq listed company reported 888,938 ETH and ETH equivalents as of Aug. 3 and said equity financing remains one of its main sources of liquidity. Its filing also says it uses most capital raising proceeds to acquire ETH, although MSCI’s May simulation predates that latest quarterly filing.
Index removal could create passive selling pressure
Deletion would matter because funds designed to track affected MSCI benchmarks would have to adjust their portfolios when the index composition changes. However, MSCI has not published an estimate of possible selling tied to the new proposal, so current claims of a specific forced outflow figure should be treated cautiously.
During the earlier crypto treasury debate, JPMorgan estimated that Strategy could face about $2.8 billion in passive selling if MSCI removed it, with a larger figure possible if other index providers followed. That estimate concerned the previous proposal and should not be presented as a forecast for the new methodology.
Strategy’s balance sheet remains heavily centered on Bitcoin. Its latest SEC filing showed 840,447 BTC as of Aug. 9 after it sold 1,690 BTC for $108.6 million and used the proceeds to repurchase STRC preferred stock. The company also raised about $653.1 million through MSTR share sales during the week, most of which went into its U.S. dollar reserve.
Metaplanet, meanwhile, currently reports 43,000 BTC on its corporate tracker. Its exposure to MSCI dates back to February 2025, when, as crypto.news reported, the company joined the MSCI Japan Index.
What happens next for Strategy and Metaplanet
Nothing has been removed under the new rule yet. MSCI published its regular August Index Review on Aug. 12, with those changes due after the Aug. 31 close, while the separate non-operating company proposal remains scheduled for possible action in November.
The next deadline is Sept. 30, when consultation feedback closes. MSCI expects to announce its decision by Oct. 16. If the methodology is adopted, qualifying deletions could be incorporated into the November 2026 review.
The May simulation also should not be treated as a guaranteed November constituent list. Company filings and financial structures can change, and MSCI’s proposal incorporates annual financial data and persistence tests. The current simulation shows which companies would have failed using the stated May dataset, not an irreversible decision on Strategy, Metaplanet or SharpLink.
Figure Technology Solutions is pointing to a strong second quarter in its consumer lending marketplace business, reporting $4.3 billion in consumer loan marketplace volume—up 132% year over year. The company also said profitability improved sharply, with quarterly net income nearly tripling as results continued to scale alongside its marketplace platform.
In a statement released Thursday, Figure said net income rose 192% year over year to $87 million, up from roughly $30 million. Net revenue more than doubled to $226 million, and net income margin increased by 10.5 percentage points to 38.8%.
Key takeaways
- Figure posted $4.3 billion in consumer loan marketplace volume for Q2 2026, up 132% from the prior year.
- Net income grew 192% year over year to $87 million, while net revenue increased to $226 million.
- The company’s marketplace volume includes loans originated via its system plus third-party loans traded on Figure Connect; Figure Connect represented $2.8 billion (65%) of the quarter’s total.
- Marketplace volume rose 262% year over year after the platform launched in June 2024, and Figure added 102 loan-origination partners in the quarter.
- Figure expects third-quarter marketplace volume of between $4.8 billion and $5.2 billion.
Marketplace growth and profitability accelerate
Figure’s quarterly update highlights both top-line expansion and a wider path to profit. The $4.3 billion in consumer loan marketplace volume reflects activity across the company’s lending marketplace, which aggregates loan products and routes them through its origination and trading infrastructure.
According to the company’s figures, the scale of the quarter also translated into improved margins. Net income margin rose to 38.8%, helped by revenue growth that outpaced costs as the marketplace expanded.
The company’s disclosed performance matters for investors because it signals that growth in marketplace volume is not merely adding transactions—it is improving efficiency, at least within the time window covered by the quarter’s financial results.
What’s included in “marketplace volume”
Figure’s reported marketplace volume is not a single product line; it combines multiple loan categories processed through its loan origination system and loans traded through its marketplace infrastructure.
The company said marketplace volume includes:
- Home equity lines of credit
- Debt-service coverage ratio loans
- Personal loans processed through Figure’s loan origination system
- Third-party loans traded on Figure Connect
For the quarter, Figure Connect activity totaled $2.8 billion, making up 65% of the overall marketplace volume. That mix is notable because it indicates that the marketplace is increasingly dependent on—and benefited by—third-party lending flows rather than only Figure’s own origination pipeline.
Figure Connect launched as part of the broader marketplace approach, and the company’s disclosures suggest third-party participation is becoming a consistent driver of volume.
Momentum since June 2024 and partner expansion
Figure launched its consumer loan marketplace in June 2024. Since then, the company’s year-over-year comparison has shown steep growth. For Q2, Figure reported marketplace volume up 262% from the same period last year.
Operationally, Figure also emphasized partner growth. It added 102 loan-origination partners during the quarter, taking its total to 489. Partner expansion is a key lever for marketplace businesses because it can broaden supply and increase match rates between lenders and borrowers, which in turn can support continued volume growth.
In addition, Figure’s management said weekly loan applications surpassed $1 billion in July. While that metric is not directly equivalent to marketplace volume, it offers a signal about pipeline strength leading into the period.
Guidance and what investors should watch next
Looking ahead, Figure expects consumer loan marketplace volume of between $4.8 billion and $5.2 billion in the third quarter. That guidance implies further growth from the $4.3 billion level reported for Q2.
For market participants, the main question is whether the company can sustain the relationship between volume growth and margin expansion. With Q2 results showing a substantial jump in net income and a widening net income margin, investors will likely watch for whether future quarters maintain similar efficiency as volumes scale—particularly given the marketplace mix that relies heavily on third-party loans via Figure Connect.
Analyst commentary highlighted by the company’s announcement also points to the marketplace’s data visibility. Bernstein analysts, in coverage dated May, predicted record second-quarter volume for Figure and tied that expectation to what they described as live blockchain data that could allow investors to monitor lending activity more closely in real time.
Figure’s next reporting cycle will therefore be closely watched for confirmation that application strength continues to convert into marketplace volume, and for evidence that partner growth and Figure Connect participation remain steady enough to support the mid-point of its Q3 range.
As Figure moves through the third quarter, traders and long-term investors alike should watch for whether reported volume continues to rise in line with guidance—especially the contribution from Figure Connect—and whether improved profitability persists as the company scales its marketplace network.
Bitcoin (BTC) edged away from weekly lows on Thursday after the US Producer Price Index (PPI) narrowly cooled in July.
Key points:
- Bitcoin avoids further downside as US PPI data provides a boost to US equities.
- Cleveland Fed president stays hawkish on the outlook for interest-rate policy.
- Bitcoin long liquidations make $61,000 a key level to watch.
July PPI extends cooler US inflation trend
BTC/USD was up around 0.5% on the day near $63,900 with volatility broadly absent, data from TradingView showed.
BTC/USD one-hour chart. Source: Cointelegraph/TradingView
The July US Producer Price Index (PPI) print was unchanged month-on-month at 0.2%, while year-on-year increased 4.7% versus an anticipated 4.9%, per data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS).
“In July, a 0.2-percent increase in the index for final demand services and a 2.2-percent advance in prices for final demand construction offset a 0.7-percent decrease in the index for final demand goods,” the BLS release said.
“Falling gasoline and energy prices provided the biggest relief,” Econoday analysts highlighted.
US PPI one-month % change. Source: BLS
US stocks gained at the Wall Street open as PPI further cooled market bets on interest-rate hikes from Federal Reserve policymakers. The S&P 500 index and tech-heavy Nasdaq Composite index were up 0.87% and 0.94%, respectively, at the time of writing.
CME Group’s FedWatch Tool showed 65.6% odds of those policymaker holding rates at the current 3.50-3.75% level at the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) September meeting. Wednesday’s July Consumer Price Index (CPI) numbers matched expectations, already resulting in a boost to the rate-pause outlook.
Fed target-rate probability comparison for September FOMC meeting (screenshot). Source: CME Group
After their biggest split over the interest-rate path since 1970 in July, Fed officials continued to strike a cautious tone over policy. Speaking at an event with the Dayton Area Chamber of Commerce in Kettering, Ohio, Cleveland Federal Reserve Bank president Beth Hammack questioned whether even recent cooler data prints would be enough to bring inflation down to the Fed’s 2% target.
“Maybe we’d get there, but if it takes another three to four years to get there, is that OK? Is that enough?” she said, quoted by Bloomberg.
Hammock was one of three officials to vote in favor of a 0.25% rate hike in July.
Related: Bitcoin speculators keep BTC price ‘pinned’ below $68.7K: Glassnode
Bitcoin faces long position liquidations at $61,000
With BTC price action still acting within a tight range, market participants’ attention focused on the extremes.
Rafael Schultze-Kraft, cofounder of onchain analytics platform Glassnode, suggested that $61,000 could become a flashpoint thanks to the large potential long position liquidations that would occur if price were to reach it.
“Long liquidation risk has built up around $61K in the past weeks. If we get there, I’d expect forced selling to add momentum to the downside,” he wrote in a Tuesday X post.
Previously, Cointelegraph reported on $63,000 now forming another key BTC price level as repeated retests increased the odds of support failure.
Bitcoin futures liquidation heatmap. Source: Rafael Schultze-Kraft on X.com
Cryptocurrency wallet company Trezor reported a breach of personal data affecting about 14,000 users through its shipping provider, ShipMonk.
Trezor’s Wednesday blog post said users who received its products from the US, UK, Sweden, Colombia, Brazil, Italy, and Portugal between May 10 and Aug. 8 were at risk from potential phishing attacks using their personal information. The company reported that 11,742 customers could have had their name, physical address, phone number, and email address compromised, while 1,947 users potentially had their name, city, and email address breached.
“To be clear, our systems were not compromised, and your Trezor device is secure, but the affected customers might be targeted by more sophisticated phishing attempts,” said the company. “Scammers can use the leaked information to send fake emails, make fake phone calls, send fraudulent letters, or potentially impersonate banks, crypto exchanges, or even Trezor.”
The breach was the latest incident involving scammers potentially targeting crypto holders using personal data. Trezor reported in January 2024 that about 66,000 users were at risk of phishing attacks if they had contacted the company’s support team since December 2021.
Crypto wallet users have revealed that scammers use a variety of techniques in attempts to gain access to their funds, including through physical letters in the mail. Other methods include text messaging, emails and phone calls claiming to be family members in need of help or impersonating authorities asking for repayment of a fake debt.
Related: Do the Coldcard attacks mean all hardware wallets are now insecure?
Decentralized finance (DeFi) protocol Neutrl has suspended minting and redemptions for its NUSD synthetic dollar after unspecified circumstances affected protocol reserves, leaving the cause and scale of any potential impairment unclear.
On Thursday, Neutrl said it had also paused other protocol functions on legal advice while it assesses the impact. The protocol did not identify the affected asset or counterparty, say whether reserves suffered a realized loss or provide a timeline for resuming operations.
Structured-yield protocol Strata later said it paused minting, redemptions and related functions for contracts in its Neutrl market, which supports several NUSD-linked products. Strata said its other markets remained operational.
With about $53.6 million in NUSD in circulation, the suspension prevents approved counterparties from exchanging the token for its backing assets while Neutrl determines whether its reserves have been impaired. Neutrl said it would provide timing and next steps when available.
Cointelegraph contacted Neutrl for comment but had not received a response by publication.
NUSD supply falls 18% over 30 days
According to RWA.xyz, NUSD had a market capitalization of about $53.6 million on Friday, down 18.4% over 30 days, while monthly transfer volume fell 72.4% to $71.4 million. However, the data does not establish that the earlier contraction was related to the reserve issue.
The synthetic dollar is designed to track the US dollar using yield-bearing crypto assets and market-neutral strategies rather than deposits held in a bank. RWA.xyz showed NUSD trading at about $0.9984, with 615 holders and 347 active addresses over the preceding 30 days.
On May 25, verification platform Accountable said its Neutrl dashboard provided continuous cryptographic proof that NUSD reserves matched the protocol’s liabilities.
Related: ‘DeFi doesn’t exist anymore,’ just onchain finance: Andre Cronje
A February assessment by risk-advisory team BA Labs nevertheless classified a proposed Neutrl integration as higher risk because of counterparty, operational and liquidity exposure. It said direct redemptions were limited to KYC or KYB-approved counterparties and that requests exceeding the liquid buffer could enter a queue targeted for completion within 48 hours, without a guarantee.
BA Labs estimated NUSD supply at $226 million and reserves at $233.7 million at the time, implying a 103.6% collateralization ratio. It said more than 87% of reserves were held through Fireblocks, while smaller amounts sat on centralized exchanges.
Magazine: Inside the fake crypto startup that fooled North Korean IT workers
The change comes after several European countries boycotted this year’s competition over the inclusion of Israel. Israel came second in both the 2025 and 2026 contests, raising questions about whether it would be allowed to host if it won.
The contest’s governing body approved the amendment after receiving feedback from participating broadcasters.
“These changes are about giving everyone involved greater clarity, protecting artists and ensuring the contest continues to provide a safe and welcoming environment, while preserving the spirit and integrity that make the Eurovision Song Contest so special,” Martin Green, director of the Eurovision Song Contest, said in a statement.
Eurovision organizers made several more changes to the competition’s rules, including raising the minimum age for performers as of the first day of rehearsal from 16 to 18.
Controversy
Five countries—Spain, Iceland, Ireland, the Netherlands, and Slovenia—boycotted this year’s competition in Vienna, Austria, in May after the European Broadcasting Union refused calls to suspend Israel from the contest. Ireland’s public broadcaster RTÉ said in a September statement that its “participation would be unconscionable given the ongoing and appalling loss of lives in Gaza.” José Pablo López, president of Spain’s public broadcaster RTVE, said that same month that “it was about time to break the silence within the EBU regarding the genocide in Gaza.”
Crypto World
MyEtherWallet (MEW) Integrates Ondo Perps, Unlocking 24/7 Leveraged Trading for Onchain Equities, & ETFs.
[PRESS RELEASE – Los Angeles, United States, August 13th, 2026]
MyEtherWallet (MEW), the world’s most intuitive digital wallet, today announced its integration with Ondo Perps, expanding its suite of decentralized financial products to include perpetual futures, derivative contracts with no expiration date. Through this integration, users can now trade continuous perpetual contracts with up to 20x leverage on leading U.S. stocks, ETFs, and commodities, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week on MyEtherWallet.com.
The integration bridges traditional financial markets and self-custodial Web3 technology. MEW customers can now access Ondo Perps to take long or short positions on major traditional market assets while maintaining full self-custody of their funds. Unlike traditional brokerages that restrict trading to rigid exchange hours and limited geographic access, eligible users can manage exposure to global markets around the clock using any supported wallet connected to the MEW web interface.
“Our mission has always been to make decentralized finance accessible, flexible, and fully self-custodial,” said MEW Founder and CEO Kosala Hemachandra. “Integrating Ondo Perps is the natural next step in our vision for the wallet as an all-in-one financial hub. Whether investors want to buy and hold tokenized equities or manage risk with up to 20x leverage on stocks and commodities, they can now execute advanced trading strategies 24/7 without surrendering control of their assets.”
Key Features of MEW’s Ondo Perps Integration:
- 24/7 Perpetual Trading: Users can access uninterrupted liquidity and trade leading U.S. equities, ETFs, and commodities outside of traditional stock exchange market hours.
- Up to 20x Leverage: Execute long and short position strategies with flexible leverage options tailored to different risk profiles.
- Universal Wallet Compatibility: Users can trade directly on MyEtherWallet.com using any wallet connected through MEW Portfolio—including MEW wallet mobile, Browser Extensions such as Metamask, hardware wallets, and WalletConnect.
- Non-Custodial Risk Management: Users can maintain full control over private keys while accessing advanced derivative products in a streamlined interface.
How to Access Ondo Perps on MEW:
- New users can create a wallet at MyEtherWallet.com to begin trading perpetual futures instantly.
- Existing wallet holders can connect their preferred wallet to MEW Portfolio to access Ondo Perps features directly.
For more information on MEW’s Ondo Perps integration and latest portfolio features: www.myetherwallet.com.
This product is not available nor intended for US citizens. Restrictions apply. For more information: https://docs.ondoperps.xyz/
About MyEtherWallet (MEW)
Focused on simple, free, and secure access to the global financial system, MyEtherWallet (MEW) empowers users to build wealth with digital assets. From launching the first Ethereum user interface in 2015 to bringing self-custodial RWAs and advanced trading tools to the masses, MEW is continually innovating its products to turn blockchain technology into a user-friendly and easy-to-use part of daily life.
The post MyEtherWallet (MEW) Integrates Ondo Perps, Unlocking 24/7 Leveraged Trading for Onchain Equities, & ETFs. appeared first on CryptoPotato.
An ICE spokesperson said in a statement that TPS had been allowed to function as a de facto amnesty program and that the program was always intended to be temporary.
“What we would say now is it’s closing time which means you don’t have to go home, but you can’t stay here,” the spokesperson said in an unsigned statement. “The good news is it’s not too late to get a $2,600 check and a free flight home.”
Scores of Haitian immigrants have also reportedly lost their jobs. Piervil said large amusement parks, hotels, and nursing homes in Orlando have begun dismissing hundreds, if not thousands, of Haitian workers since the Supreme Court ruling.
The fraught situation in the U.S. is prompting some Haitians to contemplate fleeing to a third country, despite the obstacles. Aside from the costs and a possible language barrier, many Haitian immigrants are also concerned about their own safety if they move to a third country, according to Felipe Sousa-Lazaballet, a community organizer in central Florida. That fear was heightened after reports in February that four decapitated Haitian women were found in the Dominican Republic—Haiti’s neighbor—after they had been deported from Puerto Rico. The Dominican Republic has also been deporting hundreds of thousands back to Haiti each year.
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission is reviewing prediction market “mention markets” over concerns that contracts tied to specific spoken words may be unusually easy to manipulate, NPR reported late Aug. 13, citing two people with direct knowledge of the inquiry.
Summary
- CFTC is reviewing mention markets over manipulation risks, according to two people familiar with probe.
- Kalshi removed sports mention markets until further notice while keeping political and earnings markets live.
- CFTC rules require designated contract markets to list only contracts not readily susceptible to manipulation.
- Kalshi previously flagged Trump teleprompter operator Gabriel Perez after suspicious mention-market trades produced over $90,000.
- The CFTC has not announced the inquiry, and both the agency and Kalshi declined comment.
Kalshi has responded by removing sports mention markets “until further notice,” according to the report. The inquiry has not been publicly confirmed by the CFTC. Both the regulator and Kalshi declined to comment to NPR, and the CFTC had not published an enforcement action or announcement describing the review as of publication.
Kalshi removes sports mentions while other word bets remain
Mention markets let traders buy contracts based on whether a person says a particular word or phrase. Sports versions have included wagers on whether broadcasters utter terms such as “MVP,” “ankle” or “redshirt.” NPR reported that Kalshi removed all such sports contracts as the regulator examines the category.
The suspension does not cover every mention market. Kalshi’s current page still shows active contracts tied to President Donald Trump, political appearances and corporate earnings calls. One Klarna earnings market, for example, has contracts tied to whether executives mention specific companies or business topics.
Polymarket also offers mention markets on its offshore platform, NPR reported, but its smaller CFTC-regulated U.S. exchange does not currently list them.
CFTC rules put manipulation at the center of the review
The regulatory question goes directly to one of the Commodity Exchange Act’s core requirements. Designated contract markets may list only contracts that are not “readily susceptible to manipulation.” They must also maintain surveillance and enforcement systems capable of preventing manipulation and distorted settlement outcomes, according to the CFTC’s current proposal.
That framework helps explain the concern around word bets. The CFTC has said in its broader prediction-market rulemaking that sports contracts based on aggregate performance can present lower manipulation risk when no single participant can determine the outcome through one action. A mention contract can work differently because one broadcaster, executive or politician may effectively determine settlement simply by saying a particular word. This comparison is an inference from the regulator’s published manipulation framework.
As previously reported, the CFTC has also warned prediction markets against broad template self-certifications, telling exchanges that each product needs enough detail for regulators to assess settlement methods, data sources and compliance controls.
Trump teleprompter case exposed the insider risk
The latest review follows a case involving Gabriel Perez, Trump’s longtime teleprompter operator. Kalshi identified suspicious trades tied to words in presidential appearances and referred the activity to the CFTC. Sources told Reuters that more than $90,000 in potential profits were frozen before they could be withdrawn.
As previously reported, Kalshi flagged the Trump teleprompter trades and referred them to federal regulators. Perez allegedly had advance access to prepared remarks for more than a dozen presidential appearances. The White House later removed him from his role.
The case was not the CFTC’s first encounter with event-contract manipulation. Former Rep. George Santos recently agreed to penalties over manipulative Kalshi trades tied to whether he would attend Trump’s State of the Union address.
What happens next for Kalshi mention markets
The immediate question is whether the CFTC seeks changes only to sports mention markets or concludes that some word-based contracts cannot satisfy its anti-manipulation standards regardless of subject matter. An anonymous person familiar with the inquiry told NPR the products are “potentially very easy to manipulate,” but that remains the source’s assessment rather than a formal Commission finding.
Kalshi could also modify contract structures, eligibility requirements or surveillance controls instead of abandoning the category. The company has already introduced employer disclosures for higher-risk markets and said it blocked more than 100 potential insider trades during the first quarter.
For now, sports mention markets remain suspended with no announced return date, while other mention contracts continue trading. A formal CFTC statement, additional Kalshi restrictions or changes to future self-certifications would provide the next clear indication of how broad the review becomes.
Bitcoin (BTC), by any measure, still remains stuck in a tight trading range, but there has been some movement of note on Thursday.
Sadly for bulls, the coiled spring theory isn’t yet working. Instead, BTC is headed lower, sliding below $63,000 at one point earlier this afternoon. It’s currently trading at $63,100 down about 0.5% over the past 24 hours. Other crypto majors are seeing similar declines.
The small losses are happening even as the interest rate picture in the U.S. is improving. Decent inflation reports yesterday and today appear to have taken the idea of a September Federal Reserve rate hike off the table.
The two-year Treasury yield, which was above 4.30% just days ago, has slid back to 4.14%, reflecting the sharply lower odds of tighter monetary policy.
Other risk assets — particularly U.S. stocks — continue to be where the action is. Higher by another 0.55% on Thursday, the S&P 500 notched another record high.
Strategy, Metaplanet face MSCI index removal proposal
Ralph Sutton Talks Howard Stern And Big New Projects
The bleed that started there had nowhere to go
-
Fashion6 days agoWeekend Open Thread: Mattifying Sunscreen
-
Fashion7 days agoFrugal Friday’s Workwear Report: Cap-Sleeve Pointelle Crewneck Sweater
-
News Videos6 days agoCan Astrology Help Find Gold and Silver Trends? A Financial Astrology Guide
-
Tech6 days agoRinn Pharma & Biopharma to join NordicPharmaTrain network
-
Business5 days agoHow to Start a Cleaning Business: A Step-by-Step Guide
-
Business5 days agoDatadog: Best Of Breed For Multiple Reasons
-
Business5 days agoBDC Weekly Review: Private BDC Q2 Numbers Are Strong
-
NewsBeat2 days agoCommunication cards help banking customers access services or report scams
-
Business3 days agoOil Price Today (August 11): Crude oil rises to $88 after Trump’s compensation demand dents Hormuz opening. Here’s why
-
Fashion6 days agoWeekly News Update, 8.6.26 – Corporette.com
-
Entertainment7 days agoBrand New Day’ Characters, Ranked
-
Business7 days agoAussie shares lose steam to close record-breaking week
-
Fashion7 days agoIrina Shayk Wows in REVOLVE Los Angeles’ Summer Styles
-
Fashion7 days agoBurberry Fall 2026 Takes On Commuter Style
-
Fashion5 days agoAmazon Sundays: Closet Care Before Fall
-
Politics6 days agoBe quiet, Miriam! – spiked
-
Business7 days agoCXMT Shares Drop 4.3% as Post-IPO Rally Cools Amid Global Memory Chip Pressures
-
Business6 days agoMutual Fund Manager Scoops Up Beaten-Down Stocks
-
Sports7 days agoReport: Kawhi Leonard had undisclosed deal with Clippers’ scoreboard maker
-
Crypto World7 days agoHow XRP holders can earn $4,600 daily
You must be logged in to post a comment Login