Crypto World

What is a community takeover (CTO)? When a memecoin’s holders seize the wheel

Published

1 month ago

1 July 2026

What is a community takeover (CTO)? When a memecoin's holders seize the wheel

A community takeover, or CTO, is when the holders of an abandoned token band together and run it themselves after the original developer walks away. It is one of the defining rituals of Solana memecoin culture. Here is how a CTO works, why most fail, and what separates the rare survivor from the rest.

Summary

A community takeover (CTO) is when the holders or broader community of a token take over running it, marketing, socials, and coordination, after the original developers abandon the project, walk away, or lose credibility.
CTOs are most common with Solana memecoins, where tokens are fully liquid from launch, so the token keeps trading on a decentralized exchange even after the creator leaves.
The mechanics involve the community seizing the social accounts, organizing on Telegram and X, sometimes getting listing trackers to relabel the token as a CTO, and rallying new marketing and momentum.
The appeal is an underdog, level-playing-field narrative: with the original developer gone and no insider advantage, holders feel they finally own the project outright.
The hard reality is that most CTOs fail and the token stays near zero, because a new logo and a Telegram group do not create real demand, and the same speculative dynamics that sank the project remain.

A community takeover, almost always shortened to CTO, is what happens when the people who hold a token decide to take over and run the project themselves after its original developers abandon it, walk away, or lose the community’s trust. It is one of the most distinctive rituals of memecoin culture, particularly on Solana, where the fast, cheap, fully liquid nature of token launches makes both abandonment and revival routine events. In a typical CTO, the founding developer of a memecoin disappears, sells their holdings, or is exposed as untrustworthy, and the token, which would normally just collapse to nothing, instead gets a second life when a group of remaining holders bands together to keep it alive.

They take over the project’s social media accounts, organize themselves in group chats, raise money for marketing, and try to generate fresh momentum around a token that technically has no team behind it anymore. The contract on the blockchain stays the same; what changes is who is steering the narrative and the community around it. The holders, in effect, seize the wheel of a car the driver has jumped out of.

Understanding the CTO is essential to understanding how the memecoin trenches actually work, because abandonment and revival are not edge cases there but core features of the landscape. This guide explains what a community takeover is and why it is possible at all, the mechanics of how a CTO unfolds step by step, why these takeovers happen so often on Solana specifically, a worked example tracing a typical CTO from abandonment to revival attempt, what separates the rare CTO that succeeds from the many that fail, and an honest look at why most CTOs go to zero and how to think about the risks.

The aim is to give you a clear and unromantic picture of a phenomenon that memecoin culture often wraps in heroic, underdog language, because the narrative of a community heroically rescuing an abandoned token is emotionally powerful and frequently used to draw in buyers, and the reality is far more sobering than the story.

This is educational material, not investment advice, and the memecoin environment it describes is among the riskiest corners of crypto.

What a CTO is and why it is possible

Start with why a community takeover can happen at all, because the answer reveals something fundamental about how memecoins are structured. When a memecoin launches on a platform like those common on Solana, the token is created with its liquidity placed in a pool on a decentralized exchange, which means the token can be bought and sold by anyone the moment it exists, with no central party required to keep the market running. The developer who launched it does not control the trading; the market lives on-chain, in a liquidity pool that functions independently of whether the creator is still involved.

This is the structural fact that makes a CTO possible. Even if the original developer completely abandons the project, sells everything, and deletes the social accounts, the token itself keeps existing on the blockchain and keeps trading on the exchange, because the liquidity pool and the contract do not depend on the creator’s presence. The project as a social and marketing entity may be dead, but the token as a tradable asset survives.

This separation between the token and its creator is what gives the community something to take over. In traditional contexts, if a company’s founders walk away, the company often simply ceases to function. But a memecoin is not a company; it is a freely trading token with a community attached, and the community can continue even when the founder does not. A community takeover is the act of that community formally adopting the orphaned token, declaring that they will now run the things the developer used to run, the social media presence, the marketing, the coordination, the narrative, and attempting to carry the project forward on collective effort alone.

Crucially, a CTO does not change the underlying token or its contract; the holders cannot rewrite the code or mint themselves new control. What they take over is everything around the token: the story, the channels, the momentum. The token is the same; the stewardship is new. This is why a CTO is sometimes described as the community inheriting a project rather than acquiring it, they take possession of an asset that was left behind, with all its existing properties intact, good and bad.

How a CTO unfolds

The mechanics of a community takeover follow a recognizable sequence, even though the details vary from case to case. It begins with the trigger: the original developer abandons the project. This can take several forms. The developer might pull the liquidity or sell their entire holding in a rug pull, crashing the price and signaling they have given up; they might quietly disappear, going silent on social media and ceasing all activity; or they might be exposed as having acted in bad faith, destroying the community’s trust even if they have not formally left. Whatever the form, the result is a token with no active team, a collapsed or collapsing price, and a community of holders sitting on losses and a decision: walk away, or try to save it.

If enough holders choose to try, the takeover organizes itself. A core group, often the most committed remaining holders, coordinates through group chats on Telegram and through posts on X, rallying the community around the idea of continuing without the developer. They take over or recreate the social media accounts, establishing new official channels under community control, since the original accounts may have been deleted or abandoned.

They frequently seek to have the token’s listing on price-tracking sites relabeled to reflect the takeover, since major trackers have processes for marking a token as community-run when the original team is gone, which updates the project’s public information to point at the new community channels. The community then tries to do the work a team would normally do: organizing marketing pushes, raising funds for promotion, sometimes coordinating to provide or lock liquidity, and generating social momentum to attract new buyers.

In the best cases, the community also pushes for transparency about who is now leading and takes steps to reassure potential buyers, such as confirming that the liquidity is locked or burned so it cannot be pulled again. The whole effort is a bet that collective enthusiasm can substitute for a founding team and breathe new life into a token the market had written off.

Why CTOs happen so often on Solana

Community takeovers are not unique to Solana, but they are far more common there than anywhere else, and the reasons are structural to how the Solana memecoin ecosystem works. The first reason is the sheer volume of memecoin launches. Solana’s low fees and fast transactions, combined with launch platforms that make creating a token nearly effortless, have produced an enormous number of memecoins, far more than could ever succeed, which means abandonment is constant and the raw material for CTOs, orphaned tokens, is abundant.

Where thousands of tokens launch and the overwhelming majority fail or are abandoned, there is a steady supply of projects a community could potentially take over. The second reason is that Solana memecoins are fully liquid from day one, trading freely on decentralized exchanges, so an abandoned token does not vanish; it keeps trading, which is the precondition for any takeover.

The third reason is cultural and narrative. The Solana memecoin scene has developed a powerful underdog mythology around the CTO, in which a community rescuing a token abandoned by a faithless developer is framed as a triumph of the people over insiders. This narrative has real emotional force in a market where traders are acutely aware that many tokens are stacked in favor of developers and early insiders. When the developer leaves, the community feels it is finally operating on a level playing field, with no insider dumping on them and no hidden team allocation, just the holders and the token.

That underdog framing, the sense of a genuine community reclaiming something and proving the doubters wrong, turns a failed launch into a movement, at least in the storytelling, and movements attract attention and buyers. The combination of constant abandonment, full liquidity, and a culture that celebrates the takeover as a heroic act makes Solana uniquely fertile ground for CTOs. It is worth being clear-eyed that this same narrative is also a marketing device, deployed precisely because it is effective at drawing in new money, which is part of why the romance of the CTO deserves scrutiny rather than acceptance.

A worked example

Trace a representative case to see how a CTO actually plays out, using an illustrative example rather than any specific real token. Picture a memecoin that launches with an appealing theme and a charismatic developer who builds an early community. The token runs up quickly as buyers pile in, reaching a meaningful market value within days. Then the developer, having accumulated a large position at launch, sells their entire holding into the buying, crashing the price by most of its value in minutes, and goes silent, deleting the project’s social accounts. The remaining holders are left with a token that has lost the vast majority of its value, no team, and no official channels. By the normal logic of memecoins, this token is dead, and most would simply go to zero from here.

But a group of holders decides to attempt a community takeover. They form a new Telegram group, recreate the project’s presence on X under community control, and begin coordinating. They publicize that the original developer is gone and frame the situation as an opportunity: the insider who was dumping on everyone has left, the liquidity that remains is now locked so it cannot be pulled again, and the token is in the hands of the community. They petition the major price-tracking sites to relabel the token as a community takeover, updating its public listing to point at the new channels.

They organize a marketing push, pooling funds to pay for promotion and rallying members to post about the revival. For a while, this can work: the CTO narrative attracts fresh attention, new buyers come in drawn by the underdog story and the apparent absence of an insider threat, and the token’s price recovers some ground on the renewed momentum. Whether this recovery lasts is the crucial question, and in the great majority of cases it does not, because, as the next section explains, enthusiasm and a new logo do not generate the durable demand a token needs to hold value. The example shows the mechanism clearly; it does not imply the mechanism usually succeeds.

What separates a rare success from the many failures

Among the flood of community takeovers, a small number achieve a real and lasting revival while most fade, and the differences between them, though they do not guarantee anything, are instructive. The first factor is transparent and credible new leadership. A CTO led by identifiable, communicative people who articulate a clear plan and follow through tends to fare better than one run anonymously with vague promises, because trust is the scarce resource in a project that has already betrayed its community once.

The second factor is the state of the liquidity. A takeover where the remaining liquidity is verifiably locked or burned, so it cannot be pulled out from under buyers again, removes one of the biggest risks and gives new participants a reason to believe the rug cannot happen twice. Checking whether liquidity-provider tokens have been burned or locked is one of the most important pieces of due diligence in any CTO.

The third factor is the distribution of holdings. A CTO where the token supply is spread across many holders is healthier than one where a few large wallets dominate, because concentrated holdings mean a small number of people can crash the price by selling, recreating the very dynamic the takeover was supposed to escape. A diversified holder base gives a revival a more stable foundation. The fourth factor, the hardest and least common, is genuine sustained effort and some reason for the token to attract ongoing attention, real marketing, real community activity, sometimes an attempt to build something beyond pure speculation.

Even with all of these factors present, success is rare, and it is essential to understand that these are markers that improve the odds at the margin, not formulas that produce a winner. The base rate is failure. The point of knowing the success factors is not to identify guaranteed revivals, which do not exist, but to recognize the warning signs in their absence: anonymous leadership, unlocked liquidity, and concentrated holdings are signals that a CTO is especially likely to fail, and their presence should make anyone considering participation far more cautious. The factors are a filter for avoiding the worst, not a recipe for finding the best.

The hard truth about CTOs and how to think about the risk

The unromantic reality, which the heroic CTO narrative tends to obscure, is that the overwhelming majority of community takeovers fail, and the token settles at or near zero regardless of the community’s effort. This is not a cynical exaggeration but the base rate of the phenomenon, and understanding why is essential. A community takeover changes the stewardship of a token, but it does not change the fundamental problem that sank the project in the first place: a memecoin has no inherent product, revenue, or utility, and its price depends entirely on continued speculative demand.

A new Telegram group, a recovered social account, and a wave of marketing can generate a burst of renewed attention, but attention is not the same as durable demand, and once the initial CTO excitement fades, the token is left exactly where it was, a speculative asset with nothing underneath it, now without even the novelty of a fresh launch. The community can work tirelessly and still fail, because the thing they are trying to revive never had a foundation to stand on.

Compounding this, the same dynamics that make memecoins dangerous in the first place persist through a takeover. The people coordinating a CTO are often the same speculators who bought in originally, with the same incentives to sell into any strength, so a price recovery driven by the CTO narrative can itself become an exit opportunity for early holders at the expense of the new buyers the narrative attracted. The underdog story that draws fresh money into a CTO is, viewed coldly, sometimes a mechanism for transferring losses from the people who held through the crash to the people who buy the revival. There are also coordination and trust problems inherent in running anything by committee with anonymous participants and no formal structure.

For anyone weighing involvement in a CTO, the honest framework is this: treat it as among the highest-risk activities in crypto, assume the base rate is failure, do the specific due diligence that can at least rule out the worst cases, checking that liquidity is locked or burned, researching who is now leading, examining whether holdings are concentrated, and never commit money you cannot afford to lose entirely, because losing it entirely is the most common outcome. The CTO is a real and fascinating feature of memecoin culture, and it occasionally produces a genuine revival, but it is a casino bet dressed in the language of community heroism, and seeing it clearly means holding both the appeal and the brutal odds in view at once.

Frequently Asked Questions

What does CTO mean in crypto?

CTO stands for community takeover. It refers to a situation where the holders or broader community of a token take over running the project after its original developers abandon it, walk away, or lose the community’s trust. The community assumes the roles a team would normally fill, controlling the social media accounts, organizing marketing, coordinating through group chats, and trying to generate fresh momentum, even though there is no longer an official team behind the token. CTOs are most common with memecoins, especially on Solana, where tokens trade freely on decentralized exchanges and so keep existing even after the creator leaves. A CTO changes who steers the project’s narrative and community, but it does not change the underlying token or its contract.

How does a community takeover work?

It usually starts when the original developer abandons the project, by selling out in a rug pull, going silent, or being exposed as untrustworthy, leaving a token with a collapsed price and no team. A core group of committed holders then coordinates, typically through Telegram and X, to keep the token alive. They take over or recreate the social accounts under community control, often get price-tracking sites to relabel the token as a community takeover, and organize marketing and fundraising to attract new attention. They may also confirm that the remaining liquidity is locked or burned to reassure buyers. The goal is to substitute collective community effort for the missing team and revive a token the market had written off. The token’s code itself does not change.

Why do community takeovers happen on Solana?

Three structural reasons. First, Solana’s low fees and easy launch platforms have produced an enormous volume of memecoins, the vast majority of which fail or are abandoned, creating a constant supply of orphaned tokens that communities could take over. Second, Solana memecoins are fully liquid from launch, trading on decentralized exchanges, so an abandoned token keeps trading instead of vanishing, which is the precondition for any takeover. Third, the culture has built a powerful underdog narrative around the CTO, framing a community rescuing an abandoned token as a triumph over faithless insiders, which has emotional force and attracts attention. The combination of abundant abandonment, full liquidity, and a celebratory culture makes Solana uniquely fertile ground for community takeovers.

Do community takeovers succeed?

Rarely. The overwhelming majority of CTOs fail, and the token settles at or near zero despite the community’s effort. The reason is that a takeover changes who runs the project but not the underlying problem: a memecoin has no inherent product, revenue, or utility, and depends entirely on speculative demand. A new social account and a marketing push can create a burst of attention, but attention is not durable demand, and once the excitement fades the token is left as a speculative asset with nothing underneath it. A small number of CTOs do achieve real revivals, usually those with transparent leadership, locked or burned liquidity, and a diversified holder base, but these are exceptions. The base rate is failure.

How can I tell if a CTO is legitimate?

There is no way to be certain, but several checks can rule out the worst cases. First, examine the new leadership: transparent, identifiable, communicative people with a clear plan are a better sign than anonymous accounts making vague promises, because the project has already betrayed its community once. Second, verify the liquidity: check whether the liquidity-provider tokens have been burned or locked, which prevents another rug pull and is one of the most important pieces of due diligence. Third, look at the holder distribution: a supply spread across many wallets is healthier than one where a few large holders could crash the price. These checks improve your odds of avoiding disasters, but they cannot identify a guaranteed winner, because most CTOs fail regardless.

Is buying into a CTO a good investment?

It is among the highest-risk activities in crypto, and this is not investment advice. The honest framework is to assume the base rate is failure, because most community takeovers end with the token near zero. The underdog narrative that draws money into a CTO can itself be a mechanism for early holders to exit at the expense of new buyers, transferring losses to the people the story attracted. The same speculative dynamics and trust problems that sank the original project usually persist. If you choose to participate anyway, do the due diligence that can rule out the worst cases, locked or burned liquidity, transparent leadership, diversified holdings, and never commit money you cannot afford to lose entirely, because total loss is the most common outcome.

This article is educational information, not financial or investment advice. Memecoins and community takeovers are among the highest-risk activities in crypto, and most result in total loss. Examples are illustrative and not references to specific tokens. Nothing here is a recommendation to buy or participate in any project. Do your own research and never risk money you cannot afford to lose.

Source link

Crypto World

Bitcoin Price Rebounds as Trump Calls Off Iran Strikes and Hints at a Deal

Published

2 hours ago

2 August 2026

NewsAdmin

Bitcoin’s price is on the move today, prompted by the latest developments on the US-Iran war front, but this time in the opposite direction.

After it slipped to another multi-week low yesterday evening, the cryptocurrency has rebounded by approximately $1,500 and now sits at around $63,500. The reason for this is the major de-escalation announced by the POTUS hours ago.

US President Trump announced on his social media platform, Truth Social, that although his country’s military remains “locked and loaded” to continue attacking Iran, they were asked by the Middle Eastern country and other nations in the region to pause the strikes for now.

He added that those countries are working on a new deal that would include the “immediate, complete and total opening of the Hormuz Strait, and an end to Iran’s nuclear threat.”

“Based on this request, I have agreed, for the future benefit of the WORLD and, likewise, the survival of a successful and prosperous Iran, to cancel the attack, subject to being able to rapidly make a DEAL. The Country of Israel joins me in this commitment. Get to work, everybody, and get it DONE.”

As mentioned above, BTC reacted immediately with a notable rebound. It had dipped to an 18-day low at $62,200 yesterday evening as the tension between the two had increased once again, with new planned strikes. In addition, there are other factors, such as ETF exodus and technical indicators, that suggested the cryptocurrency could face another leg down soon.

For now, though, the war developments appear to have the most significant impact on bitcoin’s price moves, and essentially every de-escalation brings back hope to the market. The actual impact is likely to be experienced on Monday morning, as it has happened numerous times in the past several weeks.

The post Bitcoin Price Rebounds as Trump Calls Off Iran Strikes and Hints at a Deal appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Source link

Crypto World

Strategy Posts $8.2B Q2 Loss as Coinbase Revenue Falls 19%

Published

2 hours ago

2 August 2026

NewsAdmin

Leading Bitcoin treasury company Strategy’s results for the second quarter show a loss of over $8 billion, while crypto exchange Coinbase reported a 14% quarterly revenue loss.

According to the two companies’ latest earnings reports released on Thursday, Strategy lost over $8.23 billion in its operations after recording an unrealized loss of $8.32 billion in the second quarter of 2026. The largest crypto exchange by volume in the U.S., Coinbase, also suffered a 19% annual revenue decline, while its trading volumes went down 24% to slightly above $145 billion.

Q2 2026 Bitcoin Price Cooldown Sees Strategy Draw Losses

Strategy grew its BTC holdings by 846 units within the three-month period ending June 30. In its report, the company’s chief executive, Phong Le, said it reduced its convertible debt to just under $7 billion and increased its U.S. dollar holdings and Bitcoin per share by 12% and 5%, respectively. The Bitcoin treasury had seen a $10 billion income in the second quarter of 2025, but Bitcoin’s dull price performance this year has supposedly caused a net loss of $8.22 billion.

“Our objective is for STRC to trade over time at $99 to $100. If STRC trades below $100, we intend to repurchase STRC shares in a regular and disciplined manner, scaling our repurchases according to market price and liquidity. These repurchases are an attractive use of capital that reduces our future preferred dividend requirements at a discount while allowing independent market demand to establish a healthy and sustainable market,” the CEO explained.

In the total revenue column for the quarter, Strategy announced it had a 6.9% increase in the last 12 months, jumping from $114.5 million in Q2 2025 to over $122 million in Q2 2026. The gross profits made by the company’s business reached $81.6 million, which it counted as a 69% gross margin compared to the previous year’s second quarter’s $78.7 million.

“In the midst of this phase of muted bitcoin sentiment and market skepticism, we continue to evolve our business model and establish Digital Credit as a new asset class. Our plan is to return STRC to health with stable demand, high liquidity, and low volatility trading near par. We believe this is the best way to create shareholder value over the long term,” executive chairman and founder Michael Saylor told reporters.

Coinbase Revenue Drops after Trading Slump, Prediction Market Thrives

Meanwhile, Coinbase’s first half of the year continues to yield lower-than-expected earnings following a continued loss trend in both quarters, but its prediction market sector has risen by more than $100% quarter-over-quarter. The exchange revealed its revenue had taken a 19% hit in the 12 months ending June 30, and its transaction revenue dropped 21%. As seen in the report on net losses, the trading company’s earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization reached $208 million, while it recorded over $300 million in losses after adjustments.

Coinbase’s fee collection from subscriptions and services slumped by 5% in the quarter but accounted for almost half of its net revenue in that period. Consumer transactional revenue also fell by 20% compared to Q1 2026, which the company attributed to a 24% decline in crypto spot trading volume. At the end of the quarter, the average amount of USDC held across Coinbase products hit a record high of $20 billion, accounting for more than 30% of all USDC in circulation.

The post Strategy Posts $8.2B Q2 Loss as Coinbase Revenue Falls 19% appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Source link

Crypto World

FTX Case Advances as Polymarket Dispute and $35K Penalty Emerge

Published

7 hours ago

1 August 2026

NewsAdmin

Federal prosecutors are continuing to litigate the fallout from the collapse of FTX, as defense teams push back on what juries can hear and how certain market activities are regulated. In the Southern District of New York (SDNY), Michelle Bond—whose husband, former FTX executive Ryan Salame, is serving a 90-month sentence after pleading guilty in 2023—has asked the court to block references to that guilty plea in a campaign finance case.

At the same time, other SDNY-related crypto-adjacent legal fights are highlighting how prediction markets and event contracts can collide with insider-trading and commodity regulation arguments. Separate actions involving a former congressman’s Kalshi trades and a US soldier accused of making a large Polymarket bet underscore that courts may soon be forced to clarify both evidentiary rules and the legal classification of event contracts.

Key takeaways

Michelle Bond’s legal team asked SDNY to exclude evidence tied to Ryan Salame’s guilty plea, arguing it has little relevance to Bond’s alleged intent or knowledge.
In a separate CFTC case, former New York Rep. George Santos was ordered to pay $35,000 over trades on Kalshi’s event contracts, with the regulator citing misleading posts about his planned attendance at the 2026 State of the Union.
A US soldier accused of earning more than $400,000 on Polymarket event contracts is seeking dismissal, challenging whether the Commodity Exchange Act can clearly apply to event contracts as “swaps.”
Across these matters, the central pressure points are evidentiary fairness for defendants and regulatory clarity for prediction-market participants.

Bond seeks to bar Salame’s guilty plea in campaign finance fight

According to a Friday filing in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York, Michelle Bond’s attorneys asked the court to preclude the government from introducing evidence about Ryan Salame’s guilty plea or any “related plea materials” in her campaign finance case.

Bond faces charges over alleged unlawful campaign funding tied to her unsuccessful 2022 congressional run in New York. The prosecution’s theory, as described in the filing, is that contributions supporting Bond’s campaign were partially funded through FTX arrangements facilitated by Salame.

Salame pleaded guilty in 2023 and is currently serving a 90-month sentence connected to conduct arising from FTX’s 2022 collapse. In Bond’s motion, her lawyers argued that Salame’s plea—where he admitted to making political contributions in Bond’s name funded by transfers from accounts associated with an FTX-linked entity—should not be treated as evidence against Bond herself.

“The Court should preclude the government from introducing or referring to Mr. Salame’s guilty plea or any related plea materials, because their minimal probative value is substantially outweighed by the risk of unfair prejudice to Ms. Bond,” the filing states.

Bond’s team further said that the plea materials do not meaningfully bear on Bond’s state of mind. They characterized the plea as an admission of Salame’s own guilt, not proof of Bond’s knowledge or participation in the charged conduct, quoting from the motion: “[…] Mr. Salame’s plea materials lack any probative value as to Ms. Bond’s guilt, knowledge, or intent. Mr. Salame’s plea is an admission of his own guilt, not evidence of Ms. Bond’s state of mind or participation in any charged offense.”

How personal litigation could become part of the argument

Bond’s motion also requested that the court allow information connected to her “contemporaneous divorce and custody proceedings.” Her lawyers appear to be positioning that personal context to rebut the government’s characterization of Bond as an “ordinary ‘individual’ donor,” despite her and Salame having divorced before the alleged criminal conduct.

While the filing’s request reflects a broader strategy often used in criminal litigation—attempting to shape how jurors interpret the campaign contributions and the parties’ relationship—the court’s decision will determine what personal-history evidence, if any, is ultimately presented.

CFTC penalizes George Santos for Kalshi event-contract trading

Separate from the FTX-linked litigation, the US Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) has issued an order involving George Santos, a former member of the US House of Representatives who was expelled from Congress in 2023. The CFTC ordered Santos to pay $17,500 in a civil monetary penalty plus $17,570 in disgorgement from profits earned through prediction market trading on Kalshi.

According to the CFTC, the relevant trades were tied to event contracts betting on whether Santos would appear at the 2026 State of the Union in Washington, DC. The regulator said Santos posted on social media about his plans to attend or not attend the event, and that these posts contained “material misrepresentations and omissions.”

The CFTC added that after the posts, contract prices moved in a direction favorable to Santos’ positions, enabling him to earn over $17,500.

As part of the CFTC order, Santos is barred from trading on prediction market platforms for three years.

The case also sits in the shadow of Santos’ criminal proceedings. Earlier coverage notes Santos was sentenced to 87 months in prison in 2025 for wire fraud and aggravated identity theft, though he served only three months before his sentence was commuted by US President Donald Trump, as reflected in the article’s background.

Polymarket insider-trading allegations tested under “swap” debate

A more direct challenge to prediction-market regulation is underway in another SDNY matter. Gannon Ken Van Dyke, a US soldier accused of making more than $400,000 trading Polymarket event contracts, is attempting to dismiss the indictment.

As outlined in the background of the case, prosecutors allege that Van Dyke traded using nonpublic information connected to a military operation involving the removal of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro in January. The US Department of Justice alleges he used that alleged insider information to wager on whether Maduro would be removed from power, leading to criminal charges filed in April.

In a Friday SDNY filing, Van Dyke’s attorneys submitted a 51-page memorandum supporting a motion to dismiss. Among other arguments, they contend that the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA) is ambiguous in how it treats event contracts as “swaps,” which is relevant to three of the charges.

Van Dyke’s lawyers argue that the ambiguity affects basic fairness: if the “swap” definition is not clear across Congress, agencies, and courts, ordinary citizens may lack “fair notice” that their prediction-market wagers fall under the CEA.

“If Congress, executive branch agencies, and courts all find the ‘swap’ definition ambiguous, how can ordinary citizens have fair notice that prediction market wagers are covered by the CEA?” the filing asks.

The defense also contrasts with the position taken by the CFTC under Chair Michael Selig, which has argued it has “exclusive jurisdiction” over prediction markets by treating event contracts as “swaps.” The dismissal motion suggests that—at least for some counts—those jurisdictional assumptions may not survive if the law is too unclear.

Why these cases matter beyond one courtroom

Taken together, the filings point to two urgent fault lines for the crypto-adjacent prediction market space: what evidence courts allow juries to consider when guilt and intent are contested, and whether the regulatory framework—especially the CEA’s treatment of event contracts—offers enough clarity for enforcement.

As courts weigh motions like Bond’s request to exclude plea materials and Van Dyke’s bid to dismiss based on legal ambiguity, traders, builders, and public officials using event-contract platforms may want to watch how judges define relevance, prejudice, and “fair notice.” The next procedural rulings could signal how far prosecutors can stretch existing statutes—and how tightly defendants can force regulators to justify their classification theories.

Source link

Crypto World

Crypto Hacks Drain $1.1B in First Half of 2026 Amid 212 Security Incidents

Published

8 hours ago

1 August 2026

NewsAdmin

The first half of 2026 was the most active six months for crypto exploits on record.

This is according to a new report from Blockaid, which shows hackers stole $1.1 billion across 212 incidents.

Crypto Hacks Top $1.1B in H1 2026

The Blockaid report found that four major incidents involving KelpDAO, Drift, Resolv, and CoW Swap made up roughly $707 million of the total losses.

KelpDAO suffered the largest loss, after hackers stole $292 million worth of crypto by faking a cross-chain message that siphoned off the protocol’s Ethereum reserves. Drift Protocol, a perpetuals exchange built on the Solana chain, also suffered a similarly huge hit, as it was exploited for $285 million within 12 minutes.

Blockaid linked both cases to TraderTraitor, a state-sponsored North Korean subset of the larger Lazarus Group. Humanity Protocol’s $32 million loss was also connected to the same attacker cluster, bringing DPRK-linked losses to $609 million, which is about 55% of all funds stolen during the period.

The pace of attacks also increased through the year, with monthly incidents going from 18 in January to 57 in June. April proved to be the most painful month, as the KelpDAO and Drift Protocol hacks wiped out a combined $577 million to push total losses in that month to $635 million.

Privileged key misuse was the most costly attack type in the first half of 2026, with losses of approximately $790 million, or close to three-quarters of all funds stolen in the period, said Blockaid. Unbacked mint exploits came second in value, led by the $80 million Resolve breach. But the hacks at the code level caused the most casualties, accounting for nearly four out of five attacks by count.

Attack Vectors Change as New Threats Emerge

The report named AI agents as a new target after hackers in May used a prompt injection attack to fool Bankr’s AI agent into approving an unauthorized transaction for about $216,000.

Cross-chain bridges also took a major hit, with attackers breaching the verification systems of KelpDAO and Taiko through forged proofs and attestations accepted by the destination chains.

In addition, security teams faced newer attack methods in 2026, with Blockaid identifying four incidents involving EIP-7702 wallet delegation attacks, where a wallet can hand control to a smart contract. Legacy smart contracts also continue to be a common vulnerability, with data showing around five cases in May and June, including two involving Aztec Connect and one targeting Raydium’s AMM V3.

Recent incidents outside the report period showed the same pressure on crypto infrastructure. For instance, on July 23, AFX Trade, BSquaredNetwork, and Verus were hit in separate attacks on the same day that collectively caused more than $35 million in losses. Recall that Verus had already suffered another exploit about two months earlier, and Blockaid linked both incidents to the same bridge contract and bug class.

Recovery results varied depending on the type of attack. Per the report, code-related incidents sometimes allowed teams to freeze funds or negotiate returns, while attacks involving stolen keys usually ended with the money moving through mixers or cross-chain routes.

The post Crypto Hacks Drain $1.1B in First Half of 2026 Amid 212 Security Incidents appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Source link

Crypto World

Michael Saylor and team maintain 12% dividend for STRC

Published

8 hours ago

1 August 2026

NewsAdmin

Strategy signals another bitcoin buy as company needs just 2% annual BTC growth to cover dividends

Holders of Strategy’s (MSTR) high-yielding preferred stock STRC will not see a dividend increase in August.

Led by Executive Chairman Michael Saylor, Strategy is maintaining the current 12% dividend on the shares.

STRC investors may have been expecting as much as a 50-basis-point hike in the dividend as Strategy has customarily raised the payout anytime the stock traded sizably below its par value ($100) for the month.

As recently as July 1, Strategy had lifted the dividend 50 basis points following June’s plunge in STRC to as low as $71.

While that hike — along with Strategy’s sale of some bitcoin to fund dividends, and a bit of stabilization in the price of bitcoin — helped STRC bounce in July to the current $89.46, that level is still significantly below par.

CEO Phong Le yesterday said Strategy’s Corporate Objective is for STRC to trade at $99-$100 over time.

Nevertheless, the company is under no obligation to raise the dividend and chose not to do so this month.

Source link

Crypto World

Key On-Chain Legal Updates This Week

Published

8 hours ago

1 August 2026

NewsAdmin

A Friday filing in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (SDNY) seeks to limit what prosecutors can use in the campaign-finance case involving Michelle Bond, the wife of former FTX Digital Markets co-CEO Ryan Salame.

Bond’s attorneys argued that evidence tied to Salame’s 2023 guilty plea—while relevant to his own conduct—should not be admitted against her because it carries a risk of unfair prejudice and, in their view, offers little direct proof of Bond’s knowledge or intent. The motion also asks the court to factor in details from Bond’s contemporaneous divorce and custody proceedings.

Key takeaways

Michelle Bond wants the court to exclude evidence and “related plea materials” tied to Ryan Salame’s guilty plea, arguing they are not probative of her state of mind.
Bond’s campaign-finance charges stem from allegations that contributions to her 2022 congressional bid were influenced by FTX-linked activity facilitated by Salame.
The SDNY motion also requests inclusion of information about Bond’s divorce and custody proceedings, contending she was not an “ordinary” donor.
Separately, the CFTC ordered former congressman George Santos to pay $35,000 in total—$17,500 in penalty and $17,570 in disgorgement—over trades connected to Kalshi prediction market event contracts.
A soldier accused of making more than $400,000 on Polymarket event contracts linked to a military operation asked the SDNY court to dismiss charges, citing ambiguity in how “swap” definitions apply to event contracts under the Commodity Exchange Act.

Bond asks SDNY to keep Salame’s guilty plea out of her case

Bond faces campaign finance charges tied to her unsuccessful 2022 congressional run in New York. According to the criminal allegations, contributions to her campaign were partly funded through FTX-related channels that were facilitated by her husband, Ryan Salame.

In the latest SDNY filing, Bond’s legal team asked the court to preclude prosecutors from introducing Salame’s guilty plea and related plea materials. The filing points to the core logic of the request: Bond is not being tried for Salame’s admissions, and the defense claims the government’s use of those materials would not meaningfully establish Bond’s guilt, knowledge, or intent.

Bond’s attorneys argued that Salame’s plea is an admission of his own conduct, not evidence about Bond’s mental state or participation in the charged offense. They said the materials’ probative value is substantially outweighed by the risk of unfair prejudice to Bond.

Prosecutors are expected to weigh heavily on the narrative connecting alleged campaign funding to the conduct of individuals tied to FTX’s collapse. Bond’s motion, however, signals an effort to narrow what jurors are allowed to consider—particularly evidence that may influence them emotionally or circumstantially rather than strictly proving the elements of the charges against her.

Why the defense is raising divorce and custody proceedings

Alongside the evidentiary dispute over Salame’s plea, Bond’s filing also requested that the court include information related to Bond’s divorce and custody proceedings that were underway around the same time as the alleged crime.

Bond’s lawyers’ position is that the circumstances of her family life affect how her campaign-related donor status should be viewed. The filing argues that Bond should not be treated as an ordinary individual donor solely because she is facing personal charges in connection with her political bid, even if she and Salame were not married at the time of the alleged conduct.

Whether and to what extent these family-law details will be admissible is likely to be a key procedural issue. It can shape the tone and framing of the case—especially if the government seeks to portray the campaign finances as closely connected to Salame’s network rather than to Bond’s independent circumstances.

George Santos ordered to pay over Kalshi predictions market trading

In a separate development involving prediction markets, the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) ordered former New York representative George Santos—who was expelled from Congress in 2023—to pay a total of $35,000. The figure breaks down into a $17,500 civil monetary penalty and $17,570 in disgorgement of profits.

The regulator said the action was tied to Santos trading on event contracts on Kalshi connected to whether he would attend the 2026 State of the Union address in Washington, DC. The CFTC stated that Santos made social media posts about his plans to attend or not attend the event and that those posts contained “material misrepresentations and omissions.”

According to the CFTC, after the posts, the contract prices moved in a way that became favorable to Santos’ positions and allowed him to make more than $17,500.

As part of the same order, Santos was barred from trading on prediction market platforms for three years. The order also comes against the backdrop of criminal proceedings: Santos was sentenced to 87 months in prison for wire fraud and aggravated identity theft in 2025, but served only three months before his sentence was commuted by U.S. President Donald Trump, as noted in earlier reporting.

Polymarket insider-trading allegations head toward dismissal arguments

Another SDNY filing, this time from the defense of Gannon Ken Van Dyke, challenges the legal foundation of allegations that he profited from Polymarket event contracts using nonpublic information.

The U.S. Justice Department says Van Dyke was involved in a military operation connected to the removal of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro in January, and prosecutors allege he later used insider information to bet whether Maduro would be removed from power—leading to criminal charges announced in April. The defense filing argues Van Dyke is facing accusations involving more than $400,000 in alleged profits from Polymarket event contracts.

Van Dyke’s attorneys filed a 51-page memo supporting a motion to dismiss the indictment based on multiple legal theories. One focus is the Commodity Exchange Act’s treatment of event contracts as “swaps,” which the defense characterizes as ambiguous.

While the CFTC under Chair Michael Selig has asserted that the agency has “exclusive jurisdiction” over prediction markets by treating event contracts as “swaps,” Van Dyke’s lawyers say the uncertainty itself is enough to dismiss at least some charges. In the filing, they argue that if lawmakers, executive agencies, and courts consider the “swap” definition ambiguous, then ordinary citizens cannot reasonably have fair notice that prediction market wagers fall under the CEA.

The case is expected to proceed on a timeline that could lead to trial in late 2026 or early 2027, based on a schedule submitted in June, and Van Dyke has pleaded not guilty to all charges.

The defense’s arguments also extend beyond Van Dyke’s personal exposure. The filing suggests the ruling could matter for lawmakers and government officials who have used prediction markets in connection with political events or public statements. Earlier coverage referenced by the filing indicates that Trump’s teleprompter operator reportedly placed more than $100,000 in bets on Kalshi event contracts tied to presidential speeches, underscoring how prediction markets can draw interest from political circles.

Across these cases, courts are being asked to decide what evidence is fair game, what definitions govern crypto-adjacent instruments, and how much clarity regulators must provide before individuals can be held criminally liable—issues that could determine how future crypto and prediction-market enforcement plays out.

Source link

Crypto World

What Happened In Crypto Legal News This Week

Published

8 hours ago

1 August 2026

NewsAdmin

What Happened In Crypto Legal News This Week

Wife of former FTX executive seeks to preclude her husband’s guilty plea

In a Friday filing with the US District Court for the Southern District of New York (SDNY) over campaign finance charges, Michelle Bond’s legal team asked the court to consider precluding evidence related to former FTX Digital Markets co-CEO Ryan Salame, her husband who is currently serving a 90-month sentence after he pleaded guilty in 2023.

Bond faces campaign finance charges alleging that her unsuccessful 2022 congressional run in New York was partially funded by contributions from FTX facilitated by Salame. As part of the filings this week, Bond asked the court to exclude evidence of her husband’s guilty plea and “related plea materials,” in which the former executive admitted to making “political contributions in [his] name that were funded by transfers from the bank accounts” of an entity tied to FTX.

Bond’s lawyers added:

“[…] Mr. Salame’s plea materials lack any probative value as to Ms. Bond’s guilt, knowledge, or intent. Mr. Salame’s plea is an admission of his own guilt, not evidence of Ms. Bond’s state of mind or participation in any charged offense.”

The motion also requested the court include information related to Bond’s “contemporaneous divorce and custody proceedings,” arguing that though she and Salame were not married at the time of the alleged crime, the former FTX executive was not an “ordinary ‘individual’ donor” contributing to her campaign.

The criminal case is one of the latest involving individuals tied to the defunct crypto exchange following its 2022 collapse. Salame, former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried and former Alameda Research CEO Caroline Ellison were all sentenced to prison for their role in the misuse of customer funds and related charges.

Former congressman ordered to pay $35,000 over Kalshi bet

George Santos, a former New York House representative who was expelled from Congress in 2023, was ordered to pay a $17,500 civil monetary penalty and $17,570 in disgorgement from profits earned over bets placed on prediction markets platform Kalshi. The order from the US Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) stemmed from Santos trading on event contracts betting on his appearance at the 2026 State of the Union address in Washington, DC.

“While buying and selling positions in this market, Santos posted on social media about his plans to attend or not attend the SOTU,” said the CFTC. “In his social media posts, Santos made a series of material misrepresentations and omissions about whether he would attend the SOTU. After these posts, the SOTU contract prices moved in a direction that was favorable to Santos’ positions which allowed him to make over $17,500.”

February X post about his State of the Union attendance. Source: George Santos

Santos is barred from trading on prediction market platforms for three years as part of the order. He was also previously sentenced to 87 months in prison for wire fraud and aggravated identity theft in 2025, but served only three months before his sentence was commuted by US President Donald Trump.

US solider accused of making $400,000 Polymarket bet seeks to dismiss charges

Gannon Ken Van Dyke is a US soldier who faces charges for allegedly making more than $400,000 on Polymarket event contracts using nonpublic information tied to a military operation involving the removal of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro in January. He was involved in the operation removing Maduro, according to the US Justice Department, and allegedly used insider information to bet whether the Venezuelan president would be removed from power, leading to criminal charges in April.

In a Friday SDNY filing, Van Dyke’s legal team filed a 51-page memo in support of a motion to dismiss the indictment based on different legal theories, including that the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA) at the center of three of the charges was “ambiguous” in treating event contracts as “swaps.”

Although the CFTC under Chair Michael Selig has claimed that the agency has “exclusive jurisdiction” over prediction markets on the basis that event contracts are treated as “swaps,” Van Dyke’s lawyers said the lack of clarity was sufficient to dismiss some of the charges.

The case is expected to have significant implications for lawmakers and government officials using prediction markets. Trump’s teleprompter operator reportedly made more than $100,000 using Kalshi event contracts related to the president’s speeches.

Based on a schedule filed in June, Van Dyke is potentially looking at a trial beginning in late 2026 or early 2027. He has pleaded not guilty to all charges.

Magazine: Here’s why the CLARITY Act’s ethics deal may be so hard to reach

Source link

Crypto World

Goldman traders are on pace for a record year. A close-up look at how they’re doing it

Published

9 hours ago

1 August 2026

NewsAdmin

Goldman traders are on pace for a record year. A close-up look at how they're doing it

Source link

Crypto World

Bitcoin cold-wallet attack spreads to 4,500 addresses as losses near $89 million

Published

10 hours ago

1 August 2026

NewsAdmin

Russia-linked Grinex exchange halts operations after $13 million ‘state-backed’ hack

The attacker working through Coldcard-generated keys is now emptying wallets worth a few thousand dollars each.

Galaxy Research flagged a third wave of sweeps early Sunday, roughly 208 bitcoin drained from 1,912 addresses between Friday midday and Saturday morning UTC.

That is just over a tenth of a bitcoin per victim. The July 30 opening wave averaged close to a full coin, 1,083 bitcoin from 1,196 addresses in 41 minutes.

Observed losses across all three waves now total 1,367 bitcoin, nearly $89 million, from 4,585 addresses.

Wave three sends each victim’s coins to its own destination rather than the handful of shared collector addresses that made the first two easy to map, and parks them in pay-to-witness-script-hash outputs, a format that can carry multisignature or timelock conditions, instead of the plain single-key outputs used before.

It batched an average of six victims into each sweep where wave one took exactly one at a time, and it scanned only the default derivation path, the standard branch of the key tree a wallet checks first, instead of testing several branches per seed.

Source link

Crypto World

XRP Price Dips to ‘Battlefield’ Zone, but Analysts See Major Reversal Opportunity

Published

10 hours ago

1 August 2026

NewsAdmin

Perhaps due to the quickly re-escalating tension in the Middle East, the cryptocurrency market has posted fresh losses over the past few hours, with BTC dropping to $62,000 after failing to reclaim the $63,000 support during the day.

XRP was not spared, as it just slipped below $1.05. The asset was rejected at $1.20 during the mid-July rally after the favorable US inflation data for June, and eventually lost the coveted $1.10 support. Now, it fights for the last line of defense before the bulls would have to defend the $1.00 zone.

Popular analyst EGRAG CRYPTO outlined the significance of the $1.05 level, calling it the ‘battlefield’ region. Although he noted earlier today that the cross-border token had managed to maintain that level, he acknowledged the predominantly bearish structure of lower highs on the 4-hour chart.

The short-term path of recovery would be a successful defense of $1.05 before XRP can bounce above $1.083 and eventually reclaim the $1.10 level, which now acts as resistance.

EGRAG laid out an even more promising road ahead for the asset if it manages to continue its recovery, with the “major price target” set at $1.30.

However, a decisive breakdown below $1.05 would essentially mean that XRP will head toward the notable liquidity zone at around $1.00, he warned.

Mikybull Crypto also believes XRP has the strength to stage a surprising comeback. The analyst claimed that the asset’s bullish reversal run is currently loading despite the negative outlook.

His long-term chart compares the current market structure with the one from two years ago when XRP was highly compressed at around $0.60. Once it broke out the upper boundary, though, it rocketed to a fresh all-time high within less than a year.

“Before the last run, I screamed for you to buy at a crazy discount. The opportunity is presenting again,” he said now.

History is not on XRP’s side at the moment, though, as August has been quite a painful month for the asset. As reported earlier today, the cross-border token was deep in the red in all four previous editions.

The post XRP Price Dips to ‘Battlefield’ Zone, but Analysts See Major Reversal Opportunity appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Source link