Crypto World
what a special arrangement means
Asked on a podcast whether XRP holders could receive equity in a Ripple public offering, Brad Garlinghouse nodded and floated a “special arrangement.” It was vague, unpromised, and electrifying to a community starved for catalysts. Here is what it could actually mean, and what it almost certainly cannot.
Summary
- Garlinghouse hinted at a possible “special arrangement” for XRP holders.
- He did not announce an IPO, a holder reward, or any concrete mechanism.
- Ripple equity and XRP remain legally separate assets.
- The most realistic benefit to XRP holders is still indirect utility, not equity.
In a June 2026 interview on the “Crypto In America” podcast, Ripple chief executive Brad Garlinghouse was asked a question the XRP community has wanted answered for years: if Ripple ever goes public, could XRP holders get a piece of it?
He did not say no. He nodded, and offered a single tantalizing phrase: that perhaps there would be a “special arrangement.”
That was the entire substance of it, four words wrapped in a maybe, with no detail, no commitment, and no timeline. And yet within hours it had rippled across XRP social media as though a promise had been made, because for a token that has spent 2026 grinding sideways near a dollar while Ripple collects institutional wins, even a hint of direct reward lands like a lightning strike.
This piece takes that hint apart: what a “special arrangement” could plausibly mean, why each version of it runs into a wall, and how a holder should read an offhand remark without getting played by it.
The honest framing matters from the start, because the gap between what was said and what was heard is the whole story. Garlinghouse described a possibility, not a plan, attached to an event, a Ripple public offering, that has not been announced and that he has repeatedly suggested is not close.
The community heard a catalyst. The reality is closer to a maybe attached to a maybe.
That does not make the question worthless, because the answer reveals a great deal about how Ripple equity and the XRP token actually relate, and about why the two keep diverging. This guide covers the moment itself, the legal wall between a company and its token, the genuine ways Ripple’s incentives align with holders, the menu of things a “special arrangement” could be, the obstacles each faces, and the framework for reading the hint with clear eyes.
The four words that lit up XRP social media
To understand why a vague phrase moved sentiment, you have to understand the state of mind it landed in.
XRP holders spent 2026 watching Ripple rack up exactly the kind of institutional milestones the community long predicted: settlements with JPMorgan, stablecoin launches with major partners, a steady drumbeat of bank deals, while the token itself stayed pinned near a dollar and change, beneath every major moving average.
That combination, corporate triumph paired with token stagnation, breeds a particular hunger: the sense that the wins are real but somehow are not reaching holders, and that some missing mechanism could finally connect the two.
Into that hunger dropped Garlinghouse’s nod and his “special arrangement,” and the phrase did what catalysts do in a starved market. It gave people something to hope for.
It helps to be precise about what was actually said, because precision is the first casualty of excitement. Garlinghouse did not announce a holder allocation. He did not describe a structure, a size, or a date.
He responded to a direct question about whether holders could gain equity by acknowledging the possibility in the softest available terms.
Days earlier, at an industry conference, he had been notably cooler on the idea of going public at all, observing that many listed crypto companies have struggled in public markets and that staying private gives Ripple more operational flexibility, while stopping short of ruling an offering out.
Put those two moments together and the picture is not a company preparing to reward token holders. It is a chief executive keeping every option open in public, declining to close a door without committing to walk through it.
The market chose to focus on the open door.
Why a public offering does not normally touch the token
The reason a holder allocation would be remarkable, rather than routine, is that an initial public offering has nothing to do with a token by default.
Ripple the company and XRP the token are legally separate things, and this is the single most important fact in the entire discussion. Ripple is a private company that sells software and payment services, signs deals with banks, holds a large treasury, and has shareholders.
XRP is a cryptocurrency that trades on its own supply and demand. Owning XRP makes you neither a shareholder nor a creditor of Ripple; it gives you no claim on the company’s profits, assets, or equity.
When a company goes public, it sells shares to investors, and the people rewarded are the holders of those shares, the existing equity owners, employees with stock, and early backers. Token holders are simply not part of that transaction, because they own a different asset entirely.
This is why a token is not company equity. A token can be associated with a company, used by a network, and held by that company, but it does not automatically become a claim on the company’s cap table.
This separation is not a technicality Ripple could wave away if it wanted to; it is the structure that governs everything. It is also exactly why XRP has spent the year failing to rally on Ripple’s corporate wins: the market, correctly, prices Ripple’s success as accruing first to Ripple, and only indirectly and slowly to the token.
A public offering would be the purest expression of that disconnect, a moment when Ripple converts its corporate value into tradeable equity for equity holders, with XRP holders watching from outside the deal.
So when Garlinghouse floats a “special arrangement,” he is gesturing at something that would deliberately break the normal pattern, a way to route some benefit of an equity event to holders of a non-equity asset.
That is a genuinely unusual thing to propose, which is part of why the phrase drew so much attention, and also why it deserves hard scrutiny instead of celebration.
The case that Ripple’s incentives already align with holders
Before dismissing the hint as empty, it is worth taking seriously the strongest version of the bullish argument, because it has real merit.
Garlinghouse and many in the community make the point that Ripple’s interests and XRP holders’ interests are already aligned, even without any special mechanism, because Ripple is the largest single holder of XRP in the world.
The company keeps an enormous quantity of the token, much of it in escrow, which means Ripple profits when XRP rises in exactly the way ordinary holders do. Whatever raises the price of XRP raises the value of Ripple’s own holdings.
This alignment is not imaginary, and it should not be dismissed as spin. Ripple’s actual day-to-day work, the partnerships, the payment integrations, the institutional adoption of its ledger and its stablecoin, plausibly increases XRP’s long-term utility and demand, which is a real if indirect benefit to anyone holding the token.
A holder is, in a loose sense, riding alongside the largest XRP whale on earth, one with deep pockets and a decade-long commitment to making the asset useful. That is a meaningful thing to have on your side.
But notice the precise shape of the benefit: it is indirect, gradual, and conditional on Ripple’s broader strategy actually translating into token demand, which, as 2026 has shown, is far from automatic.
That is why Ripple’s wins do not move XRP. The company can succeed, the ledger can gain credibility, and XRP can still wait for direct demand.
Alignment of incentives is not the same as a payment. “Ripple wants XRP to go up” is a very different proposition from “Ripple will hand XRP holders a slice of its IPO.”
The first is structural and real. The second is the speculative leap the “special arrangement” comment invites.
What a “special arrangement” could actually look like
So what could Garlinghouse plausibly mean?
Since he gave no detail, the honest approach is to map the realistic possibilities and weigh each, treating them as a menu of speculation rather than a forecast.
The most direct version would be some form of allocation to holders: a mechanism by which verified XRP holders receive shares, or the right to buy shares, in a Ripple offering, perhaps proportional to holdings. This is the version the community dreams of, because it would convert XRP ownership into a claim on Ripple equity, the very link that does not currently exist.
A softer variant would be priority access instead of free equity, letting XRP holders into an offering ahead of the general public, a perk without a giveaway.
Other versions stay within the token world instead of crossing into equity. Ripple could, in principle, pair any public listing with a token-side reward, an airdrop of XRP or of a new instrument to holders, timed to the event, which would sidestep the thorniest securities problems of distributing actual shares.
It could create a loyalty or staking-style program that rewards long-term holders around the listing. Or “special arrangement” could be far more modest than any of this, a governance gesture, a symbolic recognition, or simply Ripple structuring its business so that more value flows through XRP over time.
The range is enormous precisely because the phrase was empty, stretching from a genuine equity allocation at one end to a vague promise of goodwill at the other.
The community heard the first. Sober reading has to consider that the truth, if there is one at all, could sit anywhere along that spectrum, and that the most dramatic interpretations are also the least likely.
Why each version runs into a wall
The reason to temper expectations is that almost every concrete version of a “special arrangement” collides with serious obstacles, which is likely why Garlinghouse spoke in hints instead of specifics.
Distributing actual equity to XRP holders would be a securities and compliance nightmare. XRP holders number in the tens of millions, scattered across the globe in every regulatory jurisdiction imaginable, many anonymous, many in countries where Ripple cannot easily offer securities at all.
Identifying who qualifies, verifying them, and distributing shares in compliance with the securities laws of dozens of nations would be staggeringly complex. An offering is already one of the most heavily regulated events a company undertakes, and layering a novel token-holder allocation on top invites exactly the kind of legal risk that underwriters and regulators recoil from.
Token-side rewards avoid the equity problem but introduce others. An airdrop to holders raises its own securities questions in some jurisdictions and does nothing to address the fundamental issue that the token and the company remain separate.
Priority access to an offering is more feasible but far less exciting, and even that requires a workable, compliant way to identify genuine holders.
Fairness is another wall. Any arrangement that rewards holders as of a certain date invites accusations of favoring insiders or enabling gaming, and Ripple has spent years cultivating a reputation for regulatory caution it would be loath to jeopardize.
There is also a simple precedent vacuum. No major company has paired a public offering with a direct reward to holders of a separate, associated token, because the structure is awkward, legally fraught, and of uncertain benefit to the company doing it.
The absence of precedent is not proof it cannot happen. But it is a strong signal that “special arrangement” is far easier to say into a microphone than to build into a deal.
The catalyst-stack problem: not all catalysts are equal
The “special arrangement” comment is best understood as one entry in a larger habit, the tendency of the XRP community to treat every Ripple-related signal as part of a single, accumulating stack of catalysts that will eventually send the token higher.
In that mental model, a settlement with JPMorgan, an ETF inflow, a favorable regulatory development, and a hint about an IPO reward all get tossed into the same bucket labeled “reasons XRP will moon.”
The problem is that the items in that bucket are not equal, and treating them as interchangeable is how holders end up disappointed when the price does not respond the way the headline count suggests it should.
The useful distinction is between observable catalysts and speculative ones. CLARITY Act passage, ETF inflows, exchange-reserve changes, and real settlement volume are observable: they either happen or they do not, and when they happen they can be measured and priced.
A possible reward attached to a possible public offering is a different category entirely. It is a speculative possibility layered on a corporate decision that has not been made, with no structure, no size, and no date.
That is why where real XRP demand comes from matters more than IPO speculation. ETF inflows, exchange reserves, and actual XRP usage are measurable; a possible arrangement is not.
Stacking that on top of observable catalysts as though it carries equal weight inflates the apparent bull case without adding anything solid to it.
The discipline that protects a holder is to sort the stack honestly: give real weight to things that are happening and can be tracked, and treat a hint about an unannounced arrangement tied to an unannounced offering as what it is, a low-probability, high-uncertainty maybe that belongs at the very bottom of the pile, not the top.
Why Ripple may stay private anyway
There is a further reason to keep the hint in perspective, and it sits one level up: the public offering the “special arrangement” is attached to may not happen any time soon.
Garlinghouse has been openly ambivalent about going public, noting that staying private gives Ripple operational flexibility and pointing out that many crypto companies have not fared well in public markets.
He has said plainly that an offering is not something happening very soon, even while declining to rule it out. Ripple is also not a company under pressure to list: it is well capitalized, profitable in its core business, and sitting on a large XRP treasury, which removes the usual urgency that pushes firms toward public markets to raise cash.
This is the part the excitement tends to skip. A reward to holders is conditional on an offering, and the offering itself is uncertain, which makes the reward doubly contingent.
If Ripple chooses to stay private for years, as its chief executive’s comments suggest is entirely possible, then the “special arrangement” remains permanently hypothetical, a thing that could only exist alongside an event that may never come in the form imagined.
Even in the bullish scenario where Ripple does eventually list, the company would face every obstacle described above when deciding whether to build a holder mechanism. The path of least resistance for any firm going public is the conventional one that rewards equity holders and leaves token holders out.
None of this means Ripple will never reward holders. It means the hint sits behind two locked doors, an uncertain offering and an uncertain mechanism, and a holder banking on both opening is betting on a long chain of maybes.
The deeper reason the equity-token wall exists
It is worth pausing on why the separation between Ripple equity and XRP is so firm, because the community often treats it as an inconvenience Ripple could simply choose to overcome, when in fact it is a protective firewall that serves XRP holders even as it frustrates them.
The wall is not an accident of paperwork. It is the product of years of legal struggle, and dismantling it casually could undo the very thing that makes XRP investable today.
Recall that XRP spent years under a cloud because regulators argued it was an unregistered security, a claim that turned on whether buying the token amounted to investing in Ripple’s efforts and expecting profit from them.
The token’s hard-won legal clarity rests precisely on the finding that XRP, as traded on public exchanges, is not a stake in Ripple. The distance between the company and the token is what lets XRP be treated as a commodity instead of a security.
Now consider what a direct equity link would do to that settlement. If Ripple created a mechanism that tied XRP ownership to a claim on the company’s equity or profits, it would be handing regulators a fresh argument that the token is, after all, a security, an investment in Ripple’s success with an expectation of profit from the company’s efforts.
The arrangement the community dreams of could, in the worst case, drag XRP back toward the exact classification it just escaped, with all the trading restrictions and institutional hesitancy that status carries.
This is the paradox buried in the “special arrangement” hope: the cleanest way to reward holders, by linking the token to the company, is also the way most likely to damage the token’s legal standing.
That is why the catalyst that could codify XRP’s status matters more than a speculative equity link. Legal certainty is valuable precisely because it keeps XRP out of the securities bucket.
It helps explain why Ripple, a company famous for its regulatory caution, would speak only in vague hints rather than concrete plans. A real equity link is not just operationally hard; it is legally hazardous to the asset it would be meant to reward.
This is why the indirect alignment described earlier is not a consolation prize but, in a sense, the safer form of benefit. Ripple driving XRP’s utility and value through its business activity raises the token without making it a security, because the gains come from the token’s own usefulness and demand, not from a contractual claim on the company.
A holder who understands this should be careful what they wish for. The firewall that keeps Ripple’s wins from flowing directly into the token is the same firewall that keeps XRP a commodity, and a “special arrangement” clever enough to breach one might breach the other.
The most valuable thing Ripple can do for holders may be exactly what it is already doing, building utility around the token. The least valuable, or even harmful, may be the dramatic equity link the hint seemed to dangle.
How to read the hint without getting played
The way to handle a moment like this is to separate sentiment from substance, because the two move on very different timescales.
As sentiment, the “special arrangement” comment is genuinely meaningful: it shows Ripple’s chief executive is aware of holder frustration, willing to gesture toward addressing it, and keen to keep the community engaged, all of which matter for a token whose price is heavily driven by community conviction.
A hint like this can move sentiment and short-term price action regardless of whether anything concrete ever follows, and a trader watching narrative flows should not ignore it.
But sentiment is not the same as a plan, and confusing the two is the trap.
As substance, the honest reading is that almost nothing has changed. There is still no public offering announced, no holder mechanism designed, no legal pathway cleared, and no commitment made, only a chief executive declining to close a door while standing well back from it.
For the hint to become real, a holder would need to see two concrete things follow: an actual decision by Ripple to go public, with a filing and a timeline, and then an actual, structured mechanism for involving holders that survives the securities, fairness, and practicality obstacles laid out here.
Until both exist, “special arrangement” is a phrase, not a payout.
The disciplined position is to enjoy the signal for what it reveals about Ripple’s posture toward its community, to give it appropriate, which is to say minimal, weight in any view of XRP’s actual prospects, and to keep one’s attention on the observable catalysts that truly move the token.
The community heard a promise. What Garlinghouse offered was a maybe, and the difference is everything.
Frequently asked questions
What did Garlinghouse actually say about XRP holders and a Ripple IPO?
On a June 2026 podcast, asked whether XRP holders could gain equity if Ripple went public, Brad Garlinghouse nodded and said perhaps there would be a “special arrangement.” That was the full substance: a vague acknowledgment of a possibility, with no structure, size, or timeline attached. Days earlier, at an industry conference, he had been cooler on going public at all, saying staying private gives Ripple flexibility. So the remark was a hint, not a plan or a promise.
Would a Ripple IPO normally benefit XRP holders?
No, not by default. Ripple the company and XRP the token are legally separate. A public offering sells shares and rewards equity holders, employees, and early investors, while XRP holders own a different asset with no claim on Ripple’s equity or profits. This is exactly why XRP has not rallied on Ripple’s institutional wins through 2026: the market prices those wins as accruing to the company first, and only indirectly to the token. A holder reward would be a deliberate break from the normal structure.
What could a “special arrangement” actually be?
Since Garlinghouse gave no detail, the possibilities range widely. The most dramatic would be allocating shares, or the right to buy shares, to verified XRP holders. Softer versions include priority access to an offering, a token-side airdrop timed to a listing, or a loyalty program for long-term holders. The most modest reading is a symbolic gesture or simply structuring Ripple’s business so more value flows through XRP over time. The community assumes the dramatic version, but the truth, if any, could sit anywhere on that spectrum.
Why might a holder reward be hard to deliver?
Distributing actual equity to tens of millions of anonymous, globally scattered XRP holders would be a securities and compliance nightmare across dozens of jurisdictions, layered on top of an already heavily regulated offering. Token-side airdrops raise their own legal questions and do not bridge the company-token gap. Any holder-as-of-a-date reward invites fairness and gaming concerns. There is also little precedent for pairing a public offering with a reward to holders of a separate token, which signals how awkward the structure is in practice.
Is Ripple even going public soon?
Probably not soon, by Garlinghouse’s own account. He has said an offering is not something happening very soon and has emphasized that remaining private gives Ripple operational flexibility, noting that many public crypto companies have underperformed. Ripple is well capitalized and profitable in its core business and holds a large XRP treasury, so it faces little pressure to raise cash through a listing. Because any holder reward is conditional on an offering, an uncertain offering makes the reward doubly contingent.
How should XRP holders treat this hint?
Separate sentiment from substance. As sentiment, the comment matters: it shows Ripple is aware of holder frustration and wants to keep the community engaged, which can move short-term sentiment. As substance, almost nothing has changed, since there is no announced offering, no designed mechanism, and no commitment. For the hint to become real, a holder would need an actual decision to go public and an actual, compliant holder mechanism to follow. Until both exist, it is a phrase, not a payout, and deserves minimal weight.
This article is information, not investment advice. It concerns speculative, unannounced possibilities, and corporate plans, statements, and market conditions can change. Prices and details reflect reporting available as of June 25, 2026. Verify current information with official sources before relying on anything described here.
Crypto World
The Biggest Pi Network (PI) Updates From the Past Month: Everything Pioneers Need to Know
Although it wasn’t the busiest and most eventful month in its history, the past 30 days have still shown some new developments, features, and updates around the broader Pi Network ecosystem.
As usual, though, it wasn’t without some controversy. Let’s dive in.
Late June, Early July
Pi2Day
The second most important day of the year for Pi Network and its vast community is June 28, known within their space as Pi2Day. It usually comes with significant hype about potential token listings or the announcement of new major updates and developments.
The 2026 edition didn’t bring a listing on a big exchange. Instead, the Core Team unveiled one of the most important updates to date for the Pi App Studio. They introduced PiVerify, Pi Sign-In, and SoloHost – tools designed to make it easier for developers to build applications and for users to access them using their Pi identities.
Pi App Studio Backend Upgrade
About a week after the conclusion of Pi2Day, the team expanded the capabilities of the Pi App Studio. The platform now supports persistent storage and improved backend infrastructure, allowing devs to create more sophisticated apps that can securely store user data and operate more reliably.
Although this was not the flashiest of upgrades, it still represents an important step toward making the broader Pi Network ecosystem capable of hosting more advanced, production-ready apps.
Mid- / Late- July
V25 Deadline
The team behind the project announced a new deadline for completing the next Mainnet migration requirements. Eligible validators were reminded to upgrade to the necessary new version by July 22, when the protocol update v25 was supposed to be introduced.
Although the deadline has now passed, there has been no official update from the team that the migration was successfully deployed. It’s worth noting, though, that their confirmations have been slacking in the past few months, and missing the deadline now doesn’t necessarily mean that the upgrade was not completed.
Pi Browser Refreshed Look
Later in July, the team rolled out a redesigned Pi Browser look with a cleaner interface and improved navigation. The changes make it easier for Pioneers to discover ecosystem applications while giving developers better visibility for their projects.
The team said the most significant improvements are for the overall user experience, but added that the redesign is still aimed at making the ecosystem more accessible as the number of available apps continues to grow.
SLICE Token
Just yesterday, the Core Team said they had completed the distribution of the new Testnet token called Slice to nearly 480,000 participants for Pi Launchpad testing. Pioneers can now explore token allocations, liquidity pools, pricing data, and other Launchpad features inside the Pi Browser.
The team emphasized that SLICE remains a Testnet token intended to help developers and the community prepare for future Mainnet token launches.
Controversy
Scam Activity Detected
The first portion of the controversy section will be dedicated to a reported suspicious activity from one Pioneer. According to data shared on X, a user noted that after waiting for a while to have their PI tokens unlocked, they were not available in the Pi Wallet.
Instead, they found countless failed transaction attempts, which highlighted the growing threat of phishing scams targeting wallet passphrases.
PI Token Dump
Despite all the updates and developments listed above, the project’s native token had its worst month to date. It broke below the $0.10 support level a few weeks ago and charted consecutive all-time lows, with the latest coming on July 14 at just over $0.07.
It managed to rebound in the following days and even challenged $0.10 last Sunday, only to be rejected once again. The subsequent retracement pushed it south hard, and the token is currently fighting to stay above $0.08. PI remains down by over 97% since its all-time high at $2.99, marked last February.
The post The Biggest Pi Network (PI) Updates From the Past Month: Everything Pioneers Need to Know appeared first on CryptoPotato.
South Korea’s largest lender will use JPMorgan’s blockchain platform to support US dollar cross-border payments for import and export businesses across 10 countries.
Bitcoin price is trading around $64,500 to $66,000, little changed over the past 24 hours, and Grayscale just made a prediction that’s splitting the trading community. The firm’s head of research argued the bear market may already be behind us, but the condition attached to that view matters more than the headline.
Grayscale’s Zach Pandl outlined two competing frameworks for Bitcoin’s next move. The first is the traditional four-year halving cycle, which historically allows for deep corrections after cycle peaks. Under that model, Bitcoin could still revisit the $50,000 area before forming a lasting bottom.
— Cointelegraph (@Cointelegraph) July 23, 2026
INSIGHT: Grayscale's Head of Research Zach Pandl says Bitcoin's bottom may already be in if the Fed holds off on rate hikes.
He pushes back on the "four-year cycle" theory, which points to a lower bottom in September or October. pic.twitter.com/gJwaeOEmGH
However, Grayscale favors a different framework. It views the recent decline as a cyclical pullback within a longer-term uptrend. In that scenario, a durable floor has likely formed around $60,000 to $65,000. The key variable remains Federal Reserve policy, as a stable rate outlook supports the bullish case.
Meanwhile, spot Bitcoin ETFs continue attracting institutional interest, reinforcing the constructive outlook. Still, whether that demand survives the next round of macroeconomic data remains the biggest question. For now, Bitcoin is holding within the $64,500 to $66,000 range while traders wait for the next catalyst.
Discover: The Best Crypto to Diversify Your Portfolio
Bitcoin Price Prediction: Break $70,000 and Challenge Six Figures Again?
Bitcoin is trading around $64,500 to $66,000, pressing against resistance near $66,000. A confirmed daily close above that zone could open the path toward $68,500 to $70,000. If momentum strengthens, the $72,000 area becomes the next major hurdle. Meanwhile, support sits around $60,000 to $62,000, and bulls need to defend it.
The technical picture remains mixed but is slowly improving. Bitcoin continues consolidating beneath a descending trendline, while analysts are watching for a breakout above resistance. Grayscale adds a fundamental angle, noting recent buyers have largely returned to breakeven. That suggests the market has absorbed much of the recent selling pressure instead of delaying it.
The bull case calls for Bitcoin to break above $66,000 with strong volume. If that level flips into support, price could climb toward $68,500 to $70,000. Softer macroeconomic data would likely strengthen that move and improve market sentiment.
The base case is continued consolidation between $62,000 and $66,000 as traders wait for clearer Federal Reserve signals. ETF demand could keep providing gradual support. However, a decisive drop below $60,000 would revive the four-year cycle argument and put the $55,000 to $60,000 area back into focus. Historical volatility suggests that lengthy consolidation can still occur during established uptrends.
Trade Bitcoin on Bybit and Get a Chance to Win Our $1,000 USDT Airdrop
Bitcoin Hyper Targets Early Mover Upside as Bitcoin Tests Key Levels
Bitcoin consolidating near all-time-high territory is the kind of setup that makes large-cap BTC positions feel crowded, and the upside math at a multi-trillion-dollar market cap is structurally limited compared to earlier in the cycle. Traders looking for asymmetric exposure within the Bitcoin ecosystem are increasingly looking one layer down.
Bitcoin Hyper ($HYPER) is positioned at that intersection. It is a Bitcoin Layer 2 integrating the Solana Virtual Machine, making it the first BTC L2 to deliver SVM-based smart contract execution. The pitch is direct: Bitcoin’s security and trust model, with sub-second finality and low fees that the base chain structurally cannot offer.
The presale has raised $32.9 million at a current price of $0.0136836, with staking available for early participants. The project’s momentum through the presale phase has drawn attention as regulatory clarity around Bitcoin infrastructure projects comes into sharper focus.
For traders who want exposure to Bitcoin’s ecosystem growth rather than BTC price alone, it warrants a closer look.
The post Bitcoin Price Prediction: Grayscale Believes The Bear Market is Over appeared first on Cryptonews.
Tokenized assets grew 267% between June 2025 and June 2026, the only crypto sector to add market value, while the rest of the market declined.
The gain came from new issuance rather than rising prices. Gold tokens and equity tokens accounted for almost all of the expansion.
Gold Supply On Chain Doubled While Prices Rose Just 20%
In a recent report, CryptoRank noted that gold prices rose nearly 20% over the period. So, the price rise cannot explain the sector’s growth on its own.
However, the amount of gold held on chain roughly doubled, climbing from 524,000 ounces to more than 1 million. That gap matters.
“The growth came from issuance rather than price,” CryptoRank said.
Follow us on X to get the latest news as it happens
Notably, a year ago, precious metals accounted for nearly 100% of openly traded tokenized assets, according to CryptoRank. Tether Gold (XAUT) and PAX Gold (PAXG) held most of that market capitalization.
By June 2026, however, precious metals had fallen to 68% of the sector. The share dropped as more asset classes entered the market.
Note: BeInCrypto’s latest report, Real State of Tokenization in 2026, tracked nearly $60 billion in tokenized real-world assets across more than 7,000 products and 12 asset classes. It found that the market is growing fast, but actual on-chain activity remains far thinner than the headline numbers suggest.
Equity Tokens Arrived From Zero
Tokenized stocks and exchange-traded funds (ETFs) went from nothing to 23% of the sector in 12 months, as issuers put shares of major companies on-chain. Treasuries and private credit make up most of the remainder.
By token count, rStocks and Ondo issue close to two-thirds of all tokenized stocks. rStocks lists 568 tokens and Ondo more than 400, spanning single names such as NVIDIA and Apple alongside index products.
Exchanges entered the market later but moved quickly. Binance launched bStocks in June 2026, and Gate followed on July 3 with gStocks.
Meanwhile, meme coins, decentralized physical infrastructure networks (DePIN), and blockchain infrastructure posted the steepest declines of any sector over the same year.
CryptoRank also ranked tokenized assets as the most-listed category on centralized exchanges during the first half of 2026. That pipeline suggests issuance, rather than price, will again decide where the sector ends in 2026.
Subscribe to our YouTube channel to watch leaders and journalists provide expert insights
The post Crypto’s Only Growing Sector Runs on Gold and Equities appeared first on BeInCrypto.
“As it uses existing rules, it’s going to be much less like a standalone framework,” Lightstone said. “A crypto firm will be treated like any normal traditional financial institution,” adding that “it will still be hard to get FCA authorization.”
For established banks and investment firms already operating under those rules, adapting to crypto may be relatively straightforward. For newer crypto businesses, however, the cost of building governance, capital and custody systems from scratch could prove considerably more burdensome.
That challenge is particularly evident in the FCA’s proposed client asset regime, applying the Clients Asset Sourcebook (CASS) framework, which would require firms to segregate customer crypto assets from company funds under trust arrangements while introducing crypto-specific operational safeguards around private keys and reconciliations.
“The CASS requirements are very onerous,” Lightstone said. “That could encourage those newcomers to merge [with], be acquired by, a traditional firm that’s already subject to CASS and has those controls in place.”
Banking adoption
The prospect of consolidation comes as banks themselves appear more willing to enter digital assets now that regulatory uncertainty is beginning to lift.
“As of today, there is less than 20% of all the banks in Europe [that] offer today any type of crypto services, so it’s heavily underserved,” said Simon Schneider, CEO of Sygnum Europe.
The leading electric vehicle manufacturer reported no changes to its Bitcoin holdings in the second quarter of the year, extending one of the longest uninterrupted corporate BTC streaks.
Meanwhile, the same cannot be said about other major crypto corporate holders, while another one of Elon Musk’s companies, SpaceX, which went public recently, made a small BTC transfer, raising some questions.
Tesla HODLs
It’s worth noting that Bitcoin was not mentioned extensively during the recently reported earnings call, but the absence of any transaction was enough to reassure investors that there’s no change in the company’s holdings. This means that the EV maker’s crypto position remains the same – 11,509 BTC, making it one of the largest publicly traded corporate holders of the primary cryptocurrency.
The Musk-led entity entered the Bitcoin market in early 2021, making a $1.5 billion purchase in one of the most influential corporate crypto investments ever announced. However, it later sold 10% of its holdings to test BTC’s liquidity before disposing of 75% of its remaining position during the 2022 bear market. At the time, Musk said the firm needed to strengthen its cash position amid the growing economic uncertainty.
Since then, the company has halted any sales or purchases, leaving its stash untouched. Quarter after quarter, Tesla has reported the same 11,509 BTC on its balance sheet despite the cryptocurrency’s rallies, corrections, new all-time highs, and significant volatility.
This makes Tesla one of the few major corporate holders of BTC whose strategy has remained unchanged for over three years. Musk’s SpaceX has also retained its BTC holdings untouched lately. The latest SEC filing before its IPO revealed that it still owns 18,712 BTC. However, it made a minor transfer in early July, which caused some FUD but didn’t lead to anything more profound.
Tesla Vs Bitcoin Market Cap
While the EV continues to maintain its cryptocurrency positions, it’s worth observing the battle between the two in terms of market capitalization. Data from CompaniesMarketCap shows that they are actually very close to each other, just outside the top 10.
Bitcoin’s current market cap stands at $1.310 trillion, while Tesla closed Friday at $1.262 trillion. The cryptocurrency occupies the 13th position, far below its record of 6, while Tesla remains a spot lower. Meta Platforms and SpaceX are the other two just outside the top 10.
The post Here’s What Tesla Did With Its Bitcoin Holdings in Q2 2026 appeared first on CryptoPotato.
Robert Kiyosaki warned followers about surging US national debt, now near $39.6 trillion, naming gold, Bitcoin, and Ethereum as core holdings in his personal defense strategy.
The author of “Rich Dad Poor Dad” frames the choice bluntly, though skeptics question his long-standing collapse forecasts.
The Hard Asset Strategy Kiyosaki Has Built Since 1965
Hard assets are holdings with a scarce supply that cannot be printed at will, such as gold, silver, or Bitcoin. Kiyosaki argues that those assets protect wealth when fiat systems weaken.
His latest post draws a stark fiscal comparison. US debt sat near $9.5 trillion in 2008, just before the global financial crisis, and has since more than quadrupled.
Actually, data placed the total at $39.64 trillion on July 22, closing in on $40 trillion. Kiyosaki claims the government prints roughly $1 trillion every 90 days. The scale is hard to grasp. Spending $1 trillion at $1 per minute would take about 32,000 years, he noted.
Follow us on X to get the latest news as it happens.
Kiyosaki rejects saving in fiat currency. One core Rich Dad rule holds that wealthy people do not save money; instead, they invest in assets that resist inflation and confiscation.
“…’The rich do not save money.’ Since 1965 I have saved real silver. Since 1971 I have saved real gold. Since 2012 I have saved Bitcoin. Since 2022 I have saved Ethereum…,” Kiyosaki said on X.
Storage reflects that distrust. Kiyosaki keeps gold and silver in Swiss vaults outside Switzerland, citing cases where Washington banned private gold ownership and seized holdings.
Why Does Robert Kiyosaki Trust Bitcoin and Ethereum
The crypto allocation marks a real evolution in his thinking. He long promoted gold and silver as sound money, yet now describes Bitcoin as a decentralized alternative to endless printing.
Its fixed cap of 21 million coins sits at the center of that argument. Ethereum complements the position through smart contracts and its expanding role across decentralized finance and stablecoins.
His price targets remain aggressive. Kiyosaki has forecast Bitcoin near $750,000 and Ethereum around $95,000 following what he calls a major financial reset.
“…When the bubbles go bust I predict gold will hit $35,000 an ounce one year after the gold bubble goes pop.. I predict silver to hit $200 an ounce a year after the bust. I predict Bitcoin will hit $ 750,000 a coin a year after the crash. And i predict Ethereum to be $95000 a year after crash…,” Kiyosaki previously noted.
Subscribe to our YouTube channel to watch leaders and journalists provide expert insights.
Critics push back on the record. He has repeatedly warned of an imminent collapse, and those timelines have often failed to materialize. Hard assets also carry real drawbacks. Gold and silver generate no yield, while Bitcoin and Ethereum remain highly volatile and vulnerable to sharp drawdowns.
His broader message centers on personal responsibility rather than precise timing. Kiyosaki urges people to study markets and build positions rather than rely solely on government-issued money.
Whether that reset arrives or not, the underlying question stays relevant for investors weighing exposure to debt-driven risk.
The post Robert Kiyosaki Shares a Key Revelation on Gold, Bitcoin and Ethereum appeared first on BeInCrypto.
BitMart is shutting down its cryptocurrency exchange, with trading services scheduled to end on Aug. 26 and the company planning to complete operations by Jan. 31, 2027. In an announcement posted to its support site, the exchange said the decision follows an evaluation of its operating conditions, market environment, and future strategy, adding that the wind-down process will be orderly.
As part of the shutdown plan, BitMart has stopped taking new user registrations and deposits. Futures trading has moved to a reduce-only mode, while spot markets are no longer accepting new orders. The move places BitMart among a growing group of crypto venues that have signaled closures in recent months, including BitMEX and Dango.
Key takeaways
- BitMart will end trading services on Aug. 26 and expects to cease operations on Jan. 31, 2027, following an announced wind-down.
- The exchange has halted new registrations and deposits; futures are reduce-only and spot trading won’t accept new orders.
- BitMart’s token BMX fell sharply after the announcement amid user complaints about slower withdrawal processing.
- Arkham data indicates BitMart-attributed wallets held about $71 million in crypto assets on Sunday, down from roughly $102 million on July 6.
- BitMart said some withdrawals may require extra compliance and security checks, which could extend processing times.
Wind-down steps and what users can do
BitMart’s notice outlines a gradual shutdown rather than an immediate cutoff. It has already stopped onboarding: new user registrations and deposits are no longer allowed. For existing users, this change primarily affects how they can add funds or initiate new trades on the platform.
Trading access is also being restricted. Futures trading is in reduce-only mode, meaning positions can only be reduced rather than increased. On the spot side, the exchange says markets are closed to new orders, effectively freezing new spot trading activity while the company works through the wind-down.
The exchange further indicated that withdrawal handling may change during the process. BitMart said some withdrawal requests could be subject to additional compliance and security reviews, which may extend processing times. This is especially relevant for users who already reported delays after the shutdown announcement.
BMX drops as withdrawals draw complaints
BitMart’s native token, BMX, saw steep losses following the announcement, with the token trading around $0.09464 at the time of writing—down nearly 70% from about $0.31 late Friday. BMX reportedly touched as low as $0.1058 early Saturday before extending its decline, and it later slipped back under $0.10 after a brief recovery.
Alongside the token’s sharp repricing, some users took to X to report withdrawal delays. Posts referenced longer-than-usual processing times, including claims that Tether USD (USDT) withdrawal requests remained pending for hours.
On-chain attribution data from Arkham adds another layer to the story. Arkham’s explorer shows wallets attributed to BitMart holding about $71 million in crypto assets on Sunday, compared with roughly $102 million on July 6. The breakdown highlighted in Arkham data includes about $41.5 million in WeFi’s WFI tokens and a tracked USDT balance of roughly $91,000. While wallet attribution does not automatically confirm what portion is readily withdrawable at any given moment, it provides a snapshot of assets still associated with BitMart-operated addresses.
Token confusion: BMX versus BitMEX developments
In the days following the news, some users on X appeared to conflate BitMart’s BMX token with BitMEX’s token and shutdown process. In one widely circulated post, a Mandarin-speaking community participant flagged BMX’s price decline while discussing the exchange closure narrative online.
Replies then pointed out that the closure dates being discussed did not match BitMart’s timeline and appeared to reflect BitMEX’s own shutdown announcement schedule. Earlier coverage noted BitMEX’s shutdown date and reported that BitMEX’s token, BMEX, dropped sharply shortly after its notice.
Several other users in the Mandarin-speaking crypto community also reportedly mixed up BMX with BitMEX. It was not immediately clear whether this confusion had any direct effect on BMX trading volumes or flows, but the episode highlights a common problem during exchange shutdowns: market participants can react to similar-sounding assets and headlines without confirming which venue the news actually affects.
Why BitMart’s shutdown matters beyond a single platform
BitMart’s decision reflects a broader contraction trend in crypto derivatives and centralized exchange ecosystems. When platforms exit, the immediate effects are operational—new deposits stop, order flow becomes constrained, and users must focus on withdrawals. But there are also second-order consequences for liquidity, custody risk perceptions, and how traders price the tail risk of access during the wind-down period.
For market participants, the timeline is as important as the headlines. BitMart’s approach—ending trading on Aug. 26, continuing operations through a longer wind-down window, and planning final cessation by Jan. 31, 2027—means the risk profile will likely change in stages. Early in the process, users are mainly managing account access and withdrawal reliability; later, liquidity and settlement mechanics may become the primary concern as the remaining operational scope narrows.
In this case, user reports and BitMart’s stated possibility of additional withdrawal reviews suggest processing times may not be uniform for all assets and requests. Traders watching BMX—or any token tied to exchange narratives—may also need to account for the fact that token moves can be amplified by sentiment, confusion, and non-fundamental market behavior during shutdown news cycles.
Readers should monitor whether withdrawal processing stabilizes after the wind-down begins, and whether BitMart provides further operational updates as the company approaches the Aug. 26 trading cutoff. The remaining uncertainty is how consistently withdrawals clear for different asset types and whether any additional compliance or security steps materially extend timelines for users.
Cardano co-founder Charles Hoskinson has warned that Bitcoin could lose its position as the largest cryptocurrency if its governance system cannot organise a response to quantum computing.
Summary
- Hoskinson says Bitcoin could lose leadership if governance cannot coordinate a timely quantum-security upgrade successfully.
- Bitcoin developers are already discussing post-quantum migration plans, including BIP 361 and new signature designs.
- Cardano’s onchain governance lets ADA holders vote on upgrades, but coordination disputes have also emerged.
He made the comments during an interview with The Starting Block published on July 24. Hoskinson described Bitcoin as “frozen in time” because major changes require wide agreement across developers, miners, node operators and users. He argued that Cardano’s formal voting system gives its community a clearer route for approving upgrades. His comments present a governance argument rather than evidence of an immediate quantum attack.
Hoskinson frames quantum security as a governance test
Bitcoin relies on elliptic-curve cryptography to prove ownership of funds. A sufficiently powerful quantum computer could, in theory, derive private keys from exposed public keys and authorise transactions without the owner’s approval. The U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology describes this as a future risk and has already standardised algorithms designed to resist quantum attacks.
Hoskinson said quantum computing would test whether Bitcoin can change without weakening the qualities that support its value. He said BTC may not remain the leading cryptocurrency if its governance cannot make progress. However, he did not name another network that would replace it or give a date for a threat.
Bitcoin developers are already studying migration options
Bitcoin has no formal onchain voting body. Developers can propose code, but users and node operators decide whether to run it. Miners, exchanges and wallet providers also influence whether an upgrade gains enough support. This slower process avoids frequent rule changes, though it can make urgent coordination harder.
Work on quantum resistance is already active. Bitcoin Optech has tracked BIP 361, which outlines a phased move away from current ECDSA and Schnorr signatures after developers select a post-quantum system. Other proposals cover new address formats, hybrid signatures and recovery paths. These ideas remain under review.
Any such change would also need wallets, exchanges, custodians and long-dormant holders to migrate funds without splitting the network or creating conflicting ownership rules during a limited transition.
Some researchers estimate that millions of BTC sit in addresses whose public keys are visible. Those coins could face greater exposure if a capable quantum computer appears. The timing remains uncertain, and researchers continue to debate which coins should move, freeze or remain spendable.
Cardano points to formal onchain governance
Cardano completed its move to full community governance through the Plomin hard fork in January 2025. ADA holders can vote directly or delegate voting power to representatives known as DReps. Stake pool operators and a constitutional committee also take part in selected decisions. The system can approve hard forks and treasury withdrawals onchain.
Hoskinson said Cardano could use that structure to vote on a migration away from quantum-vulnerable infrastructure. Yet Cardano has not completed such a migration. Its governance system must still evaluate technical designs, approve funding and organise users, developers and service providers around any change.
The process has also produced disputes.Cardano delegates rejected or challenged several proposals linked to Hoskinson and Input Output during 2026. One request included research into Leios scaling and quantum-resistant cryptography. Formal voting does not guarantee approval of a founder-backed plan.
Cardano prepares scaling work alongside security research
Hoskinson also said Cardano is preparing for its largest upgrade and claimed the network would become “60 times faster.” Development updates show teams are testing Ouroboros Leios, a design intended to increase throughput by separating block roles and allowing more work in parallel. Developers continue to integrate the prototype with Cardano node software.
The 60-fold figure remains Hoskinson’s estimate rather than a measured result from the live network. Leios still requires testing, technical review and governance approval. Cardano’s recent van Rossem hard fork shows that DReps, stake pool operators and the constitutional committee can coordinate an upgrade.
Hoskinson described Cardano as a “spiritual successor” to Bitcoin because it keeps a fixed-supply monetary model while adding smart contracts and formal governance. Bitcoin supporters may reject that comparison, since Bitcoin’s limited change process forms part of its security model. Bitcoin depends on broad offchain consensus, while Cardano records many decisions directly onchain.
The quantum issue remains open for both networks. Bitcoin developers are designing migration options, while Cardano is funding research and building governance tools. Neither network has deployed a complete post-quantum transaction system. The practical test will come when developers agree on secure cryptography and communities must decide how to move users and funds.
Institutional trading platform LMAX Group is working with Morgan Stanley and KBW, Stifel’s investment banking arm, to review a possible sale or public listing.
Summary
- LMAX reviews a sale, SPAC merger, or listing that could value it at $5 billion.
- Morgan Stanley and KBW are advising LMAX, while Nasdaq ranks as its preferred listing venue.
- Ripple’s $150 million financing and Omnia exchange launch support LMAX’s push into institutional digital markets.
People familiar with the private discussions told CoinDesk that a transaction could value the London-based company at up to $5 billion. The options include a full sale, a special purpose acquisition company merger, and initial public offerings in the U.S. or Europe.
A Nasdaq listing currently ranks as the preferred route, according to one of the unnamed sources. However, LMAX has not started a formal public process or agreed to a transaction. The company said it “declines to comment on speculation.” Morgan Stanley also declined to comment, while Stifel had not responded when the report was published.
LMAX considers several routes to a $5 billion valuation
LMAX operates trading venues and infrastructure for foreign exchange and digital assets. Its clients include banks, brokers, hedge funds and asset managers. The group owns LMAX Exchange, LMAX Global and LMAX Digital. It runs matching infrastructure in London, New York, Tokyo and Singapore, giving institutional clients access across major financial centres. The U.K. Financial Conduct Authority authorises LMAX Limited for specified financial activities.
The reported review does not mean LMAX will complete a sale or IPO. One source said the company felt no pressure to list while crypto markets remained weak. Its established foreign-exchange operation gives it a wider revenue base than companies that depend only on digital asset trading. That mix could allow management and shareholders to wait for better market conditions. It also gives potential buyers exposure to established currency markets and institutional crypto services.
Ripple financing supports LMAX’s cross-asset expansion
LMAX expanded its digital asset business in January through a multi-year partnership with Ripple. Ripple agreed to provide $150 million in financing, while LMAX agreed to integrate the RLUSD stablecoin across its institutional infrastructure. The companies said clients could use RLUSD for settlement, collateral and margin across spot crypto, perpetual futures and contracts for difference.
As crypto.news previously reported, the agreement formed part of a wider flow of capital into centralised finance and institutional market infrastructure. LMAX said RLUSD would also connect with LMAX Custody and its Kiosk service. The arrangement gives institutions another way to move dollar-denominated value between foreign exchange and digital asset positions outside standard banking hours.
Omnia and Kiosk widen the platform beyond spot crypto
In February, LMAX introduced Omnia Exchange, a 24/7 platform designed to let institutions convert traditional and tokenised assets through one API. The company said Omnia would support foreign exchange, cryptocurrencies, commodities and tokenised securities. The launch moved LMAX beyond its earlier focus on separate FX and spot crypto venues.
LMAX added Kiosk in May to combine custody, collateral management and trading access.institutions can deposit digital assets into LMAX Custody and use them across spot FX, precious metals, cryptocurrencies, perpetual futures and other products. In July, LMAX and Standard Chartered also completed their first digital asset prime brokerage trades for Bitcoin and Ether with T+1 settlement.
Crypto firms pursue deals despite weaker IPO conditions
The reported review comes as crypto firms seek scale through acquisitions and public listings. Kraken parent Payward completed its purchase of U.S. derivatives platform Bitnomial in May. Bullish also agreed to buy transfer agent Equiniti for $4.2 billion, adding shareholder recordkeeping and tokenisation infrastructure to its exchange business.
Public market conditions remain uneven. As crypto.news reported, hardware wallet maker Ledger paused its IPO plans because of weak investor demand and difficult market conditions. Blockchain.com, by contrast, filed confidentially for a U.S. listing. LMAX’s foreign-exchange business and recent institutional partnerships may separate it from crypto-only candidates, but any valuation will depend on market demand, financial results and the final structure.
LMAX last disclosed a major private valuation in July 2021. J.C. Flowers agreed to buy a 30% stake for $300 million, valuing the group at $1 billion. That deal involved a secondary sale by employees, while chief executive David Mercer and the management team kept substantial holdings.
A valuation of up to $5 billion would mark a fivefold increase from the 2021 transaction. No adviser or company statement has confirmed that figure as an agreed price. The strategic review remains at an early stage, and LMAX may choose to remain private if available offers or listing terms do not meet its requirements. LMAX has not named a timetable for completing the review process.
The CRYPTO BULL REVERSAL Setting Up! (WARNING For Bitcoin, Ethereum, Altcoins)
Meghan Markle reveals Prince Harry’s favourite meal and gives a sweet nod to their children Archie and Lilibet on MasterChef Australia
Why the Mavericks Insist Their All-Star Point Guard Isn’t Going Anywhere
-
Fashion2 days agoWeekend Open Thread: Brooks Brothers
-
Politics7 days agoDemocrats look to World Cup watch parties to register thousands of voters
-
News Videos7 days agoBig Money Is Entering XRP
-
Tech5 days agoSail Virtually Aboard The “Itanic” With IA-64 Emulator
-
Tech5 days agoTurtle Beach Command Series KB7 review: a nifty screen-equipped gaming keyboard
-
Crypto World5 days agoGrayscale Files For Worldcoin ETF, WLD Registers Sharp Rise
-
NewsBeat6 days agoUnregistered fitter used Gas Safe logo on business flyers
-
Business4 days agoNew Jersey voter registration controversy explained: How 6,600 noncitizens got on the rolls, and what happens next
-
Entertainment5 days agoJohnny Depp’s R-Rated Gothic Cult Classic Gets New Release Ahead of Sydney Sweeney Remake
-
Crypto World3 days agoEthics, other provisions in crypto Clarity Act to be further discussed
-
Tech6 days agoWatch Flock Safety CEO Garrett Langley discuss the future of surveillance at TechCrunch Disrupt 2026
-
NewsBeat5 days agoShanghai science forum photos show China’s AI and robotics advances in rivalry with US
-
Crypto World6 days agoCircle’s President Sold Over 360,000 Shares, The Filings Explain Why
-
Tech6 days agoSubway Sandwich Computers Get a Second Life as Gaming Machines
-
Sports2 days ago2026 3M Open leaderboard: Scottie Scheffler finds putter in Round 1, sits three back
-
News Videos3 days agoThe Peugeot Family: How 200 Years of an “Old Money” Dynasty Died in A Boardroom
-
Fashion2 days ago16 Dresses for the High Summer Event
-
Tech7 days agoHow To Use Claude’s Reflect Dashboard And Learn When It’s Time To Touch Grass
-
Tech6 days agoThe 35 Best Board Games for Family Game Night
-
Entertainment6 days agoStephen Colbert Returns to Social Media After Late Show End
You must be logged in to post a comment Login