TheDinarian
News • Business • Investing & Finance
Will MiCA stifle stablecoins?
April 20, 2023
post photo preview

Highlights

  • MiCA bans interest/benefit payments for stablecoins
  • This likely applies only to interest paid by the issuer
  • DeFi protocols often provide regulated activities
  • National regulators could decide someone controls the DeFi protocol (is a CASP)
  • Every transaction other than P2P self custody is caught by AML travel rule (no €1,000 minimum)
  • Do stablecoin issuers have to KYC every holder?

With the EU’s Markets in Crypto Assets Regulations (MiCAR) receiving a final vote tomorrow, some have wondered about the impact on stablecoins. Specifically, if a ban on stablecoin interest could inhibit decentralized finance (DeFi) and how additional anti-money laundering (AML) crypto-asset regulations could impact transactions. Stablecoins should do just fine despite the interest ban and vastly expanded AML, but the conclusion comes with caveats. 

There was no intention for the first iteration of MiCAR to address DeFi explicitly. However, as we’ll show, it would be a mistake to assume that all DeFi protocols get a free pass.

MiCA bans stablecoin interest and benefits

Starting with the MiCAR interest clause, stablecoins are either e-money tokens or asset-referenced tokens, but there’s a ban on interest on both

The big picture vision for stablecoins is to create a low cost programmable form of payments for everyday use. Today adoption for these purposes is limited, and DeFi has been one of the growth engines of stablecoins. A big part of that has been the use of stablecoins on DeFi lending and borrowing protocols such as Compound and Aave. And they pay interest.

Article 45 Prohibition of interests
By derogation to Article 12 of Directive 2009/110/EC, no issuer of e-money tokens or crypto-asset service providers shall grant interest or any other benefit related to the length of time during which a holder of e-money tokens holds such e-money tokens.

So the question is whether these interest clauses mean that regulators will pursue Aave and Compound for paying interest. The answer boils down to two factors: is the protocol interest the same type of interest or benefit that the prohibition refers to? And do Aave and Compound get a free pass because this iteration of MiCAR doesn’t directly target DeFi? The answers are broadly positive for stablecoins but not clear cut.

Does the MiCA interest ban apply to lending protocols?

The interest ban clause derives from e-money laws which also ban interest to differentiate e-money from banking. Hence the real intent of the ban is to prevent the stablecoin issuer from behaving like a bank.

Clifford Chance’s Diego Ballon Ossio highlighted to Ledger Insights that the clause is positioned in the section regarding stablecoin issuance, reinforcing the view that it’s targeting stablecoin issuers. However, it also mentions crypto asset service providers (CASPs). The lawyer noted that the mention of CASPs prevents a service provider from becoming a deposit taker of electronic money. 

Ledger Insights believes that the centralized crypto lender Nexo does something similar. Currently, someone can send euros to Nexo, which converts it into its own euro stablecoin EURx on which it pays interest. You won’t find EURx on crypto trading platforms because it’s an internal stablecoin which is currently allowed as an exception under current e-money regulations. But probably not with this new MiCAR clause.

Regarding whether MiCA impacts lending protocols, the Clifford Chance view is that lending protocols enable secondary value added services that are not inherently part of the stablecoin. In contrast, the interest and benefits clause intends to prevent stablecoin issuers from behaving like banks. There are analogies with other financial transactions, such as securities lending, where the compensation would not be considered a relevant interest or benefit because the issuer does not provide the service.

“If you have secondary transactions, repos (repurchase agreements), securities lending or collateral and I make my assets available, that is not inherent to the asset as such, that is an extra service,” said Clifford Chance partner Marc Benzler. But he added that it depends on the specific circumstances. 

There was also the question of whether a return earned on money deposited in a liquidity pool for automated market makers (AMM) would be a benefit tied to the stablecoin. However, that would even more obviously be a secondary type of transaction. But there could be unexpected legal risks involved in liquidity pool participation, as we’ll explore later.

Do DeFi protocols get a free pass?

Despite MiCAR not explicitly targeting DeFi, some DeFi protocols could be targeted for enforcement by national regulators.

“DeFi is the elephant in the room with MiCA,” said Ballon Ossio. “It’s been kicked down the road. And it creates circumstances where the rules either don’t work or can be circumvented by using the technology. The person who’s doing that carries a degree of legal risk.”

While MiCA is a uniform regulation across the EU, it will be enforced by national regulators, which means the treatment won’t be the same everywhere.

MiCAR particularly targets the activities of crypto asset service providers (CASPs), meaning centralized finance (CeFi) providers are the main players impacted. However, if a national regulator deems that someone involved in a DeFi protocol controls the processes and is involved in a regulated activity, they will consider them a CASP.

The draft regulation covers a list of a dozen CASP activities which include functions that DeFi protocols often perform, such as: 

  • operating a trading platform
  • the exchange of crypto-assets for other crypto-assets
  • the reception and transmission of orders for crypto-assets on behalf of third parties.

Ballon Ossio says a regulator isn’t going to target a decentralized autonomous organization (DAO) just because it’s a DAO. “They couldn’t get them because they’re a DeFi protocol. They’d have to get them because they’re doing one of the CASP activities and somebody is responsible for it, and they haven’t gotten a license for it,” he said.

A decision on whether someone is carrying on a particular activity is a question of local law and the particular facts. For example, in some jurisdictions, it could be a matter of whether someone controls the code or has significant influence even if they are not the sole controller.

“The question is can you prove it, make a case, bring an enforcement action?” he added. “You have layers of regulatory decision-making that might prevent anything happening to the protocol. But the fundamental principle of whether it is out of scope because it’s a protocol is something I think that regulators will push back on.”

Hence, DeFi protocols won’t necessarily get a free pass. But they also are less likely to be the first targets of enforcement.

Stablecoins, AML and the travel rule

A raft of new EU laws around anti money laundering are being finalized that include crypto but are not specific to it. Additionally, specific AML crypto-asset legislation for the so-called travel rule had its final debate alongside MiCAR today. 

Dealing first with the travel rule, one surprise is the EU has dropped the de minimis threshold of €1,000, meaning every single transaction involving a CASP will require the AML travel rule data to be passed along.

The one plus of the travel rule is it doesn’t apply to self custody transactions that don’t involve a CASP. The draft law has a clause that excludes transactions where “the transfers constitute person-to-person transfers of crypto-assets carried out without the involvement of a crypto-asset service provider.” And it adds that e-money tokens are considered as crypto-assets for this clause.

Will AML mean every stablecoin holder must be KYC’d?

The broader AML legislation raises some thorny questions for stablecoins.

The legislation considers an e-money issuer as a financial institution with an AML responsibility when establishing a business relationship or if token holders plan “occasional” transactions. 

Some argue that a holder of a stablecoin has a relationship with the issuer and hence the stablecoin issuer needs to perform AML on every holder, which would be bad news for stablecoins

A contrasting view is to consider an analogy, such as whether a bond issuer has to perform KYC or AML relating to secondary market transactions in which it has no direct involvement. A different example is insurers only need to perform AML on beneficiaries at the point of payout. So a stablecoin issuer could execute KYC and AML at redemption.

However, this is a topic where we have yet to come to a definitive conclusion.

The many MiCA questions

After the detour on the separate AML legislation, one final point regarding MiCA is the considerable uncertainty around many aspects of the bill. But that is the norm for financial market regulations. The industry will lobby and the regulators will respond with answers to frequently asked questions.

Talking generally about financial services regulations, Ballon Ossio observed, “It’s surprising how sophisticated players are used to dealing with uncertainty in the context of financial services regulation.” He added, “If you come at it cold, there are lots of gaps in there that the market has dealt with through custom and now has become settled. That needs to happen with MiCA.”

Link

community logo
Join the TheDinarian Community
To read more articles like this, sign up and join my community today
0
What else you may like…
Videos
Podcasts
Posts
Articles
Watch this video, it's important.

John McAfee: "Take the key, turn the lock & exit your cage". 😉

00:10:50
Jekyll Island: The Truth Behind The Federal Reserve 💲

Jekyll Island: The Truth Behind The Federal Reserve by Bill (William) T. Still. 💵

Explores the hidden origins of the Fed & the secret 1910 meeting that shaped modern money. 📚

02:06:01
Down The 🐇 Rabbit Hole 🕳

Watch the pine tree 🌲 in the background. 👀

00:01:35
👉 Coinbase just launched an AI agent for Crypto Trading

Custom AI assistants that print money in your sleep? 🔜

The future of Crypto x AI is about to go crazy.

👉 Here’s what you need to know:

💠 'Based Agent' enables creation of custom AI agents
💠 Users set up personalized agents in < 3 minutes
💠 Equipped w/ crypto wallet and on-chain functions
💠 Capable of completing trades, swaps, and staking
💠 Integrates with Coinbase’s SDK, OpenAI, & Replit

👉 What this means for the future of Crypto:

1. Open Access: Democratized access to advanced trading
2. Automated Txns: Complex trades + streamlined on-chain activity
3. AI Dominance: Est ~80% of crypto 👉txns done by AI agents by 2025

🚨 I personally wouldn't bet against Brian Armstrong and Jesse Pollak.

👉 Coinbase just launched an AI agent for Crypto Trading

🔺 What’s really hidden beneath the Great Pyramids of Giza?

Join us as the Rabbit Hole Remote Viewing Team takes an unprecedented psychic dive deep below the sands of Egypt to uncover mind-blowing structures, ancient energy systems, and interdimensional gateways.

🌍 Using remote viewing techniques pioneered by Ingo Swann, our viewers explore mysterious vertical shafts, spiraling tunnels, and energetic vortexes detected by Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) technology.

Could these underground chambers hold the legendary Hall of Records?

Discover the mysterious frequencies and tones recorded inside the pyramids.

Witness how energy, consciousness, and ancient engineering converge in ways modern science can barely explain.

🚨 US GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN DEAL UPDATE 🚨

Senate Majority Leader John Thune has indicated that a deal to end the US government shutdown is “nearly ready,” signaling progress in ongoing negotiations. This development comes after weeks of impasse, with both parties seeking a resolution to the longest government shutdown in US history.

🔑 Key Points

🔹️ Progress Towards Resolution: Thune’s statement suggests that a deal is “coming together,” indicating that both parties are closer to reaching an agreement.

🔹️ Ongoing Negotiations: The Senate is expected to continue working through the weekend in hopes of finalizing a resolution. Thune has planned a test vote on a narrow spending package.

🔹️ Health Care Subsidies: A major point of contention remains the extension of health care subsidies under the Affordable Care Act. Democrats are pushing for an extension, while Republicans have been reluctant to negotiate on this issue until the government is reopened.

🔹️ Bipartisan ...

JUST IN: 🇺🇸 President Trump says Americans will get at least a $2000 dividend payment, excluding high-income earners.

post photo preview
post photo preview
3I/ATLAS — Secret Laws Of Gravity
Unlocking the future of space travel through the precise calculation of time and orbital trajectories.

"My preliminary analysis suggests two principal hypotheses regarding the reported phenomenon known as '3I/Atlas':

  1. A Coordinated Psychological Operation (PsyOp): The phenomenon may constitute a calculated effort to manipulate public sentiment or induce fear, potentially preceding a planned, large-scale deception (referred to informally as 'Project Bluebeam').

  2. A Highly Anomalous Object: Alternatively, the phenomenon represents an authentic, significant anomaly warranting serious scientific or intelligence scrutiny.

Regardless of its origin, '3I/Atlas' represents an historically noteworthy development that necessitates close, informed observation."

 

~Crypto Michael | The Dinarian 🙏

Abstract Introduction:

New data is now showing something that arrived early and its changing colors as we previously predicted.

In orbital mechanics where trajectories are calculated centuries in advance with accurate precision measured in seconds.

A 11-minute deviation is not a rounding error.

It’s not a typo in the database.

It’s not close enough.

"It’s Physically impossible.”

Now The longest government shutdown in U.S. history still blocking NASA releases while the object executed its closest Fly-by approaches to Mars, The Sun and Venus at the moment of maximum observational blackout.

But orbital mechanics don’t care about “government shutdowns.”

Our observations Don’t Stop.

And the math doesn’t wait for “Press releases.”

The math says this:

“If 3I/ATLAS is natural, it should have lost about 5.5 billion tons of mass.”

It didn't.

1. The 5.5 Billion Ton Problem:

Let’s start with what everyone agrees on: 3I/ATLAS “now” arrived earlier than pure gravitational predictions would allow. Even though we have been mentioning this trajectory change over 2 Weeks ago (October 21st Article HERE) TRACKING 3I/ATLAS .

The scientific consensus explanation? “Natural outgassing” the "rocket effect." As water ice sublimates near the Sun, it creates thrust, like a slow-motion rocket engine powered by evaporating ice. Comets do this all the time. It’s normal. It’s natural. It’s explainable.

Except for ONE problem.

The Physics Don’t Add Up!”

To generate enough thrust to arrive approximately “11 minutes early” would require shedding a staggering amount of mass.

Our calculations show “over 5.5 billion tons” of gas ejected over the perihelion passage.

Think about that for a moment.

That’s not a little puff of vapor.

That’s not some gas leaking from surface cracks.

That’s 15% of the object’s total estimated mass.

If 3I/ATLAS lost that much material naturally, it would create a debris cloud larger than Jupiter’s magnetosphere—visible to amateur telescopes from Earth. Absolutely impossible to miss in professional observations, and bright enough to be catalogued by every sky survey on the planet.

1.1 ~ The Plume Paradox:

Here’s where it gets interesting:

No such cloud has yet to be observed.

Not by Hubble. Not by JWST. Not by ground-based observatories. Not by the Mars orbiters that watched it pass at 30 million kilometers.

The brightness remained within “expected limits.” The coma showed stable & geometric shifting features. The tail structure now disappeared (but that’s another story). The main one is that: “The debris cloud that should exist — simply doesn’t.”

This isn't a minor discrepancy.

This is complete, mathematical failure of the natural comet hypothesis.

Part 2: The Industrial Signature:

So if natural sublimation didn't create the thrust, what did?

The answer is hidden in the chemistry—specifically, in what shouldn’t be there. “The Nickel Anomaly.” When multiple astronomers analyzed 3I/ATLAS’s spectral signature, they found something extraordinary: “nickel vapor” (Ni) at extreme distances from the Sun, where temperatures should be far too cold for metals to vaporize naturally.

Nickel doesn't just evaporate on its own at those temperatures.

It needs HELP.

And there’s only one known process—natural or industrial—that produces a volatile nickel-carbon compound at cold temperatures which we have said several times previously;

Nickel Tetracarbonyl: Ni(CO)₄

This is not a natural cosmic process.

This is an “industrial chemical pathway” used on EARTH for metal refinement!!!

It forms at 120°C and decomposes at 180°C allowing nickel to vaporize at temperatures where water ice would remain frozen solid.

It is LITERALLY, an industrial refrigerant for metal processing.

The presence of Ni(CO)₄ in the plume tells us two things:

  • The core is not ice — It’s a nickel-rich, engineered structure.
  • The process is not passive sublimation — it’s an active, controlled system.

The nickel vapor isn’t contamination.

It’s not a coincidence.

It’s Exhaust.

3. Secret Gravity (SOEG) Model:

This is where our research team proposes something NEW.

We call it The “Self-Optimizing Ejection Guidance (SOEG) Model”

A Brand New Scientifically defensible framework that explains the acceleration not as chaotic outgassing, but as “controlled propulsion.”

The SOEG Model (Project EE / 3IE)

The System:
• Volatile Reservoir — CO₂ ice + Nickel-rich metallic core.
• Solar Heating — Perihelion triggers sublimation at optimal moment.
• Magnetic Ionization — Internal magnetic field ionizes nickel vapor into plasma.
• Anisotropic Jets — Plasma channeled through focused nozzles. (not random cracks)
• Thrust Optimization — Maximum momentum transfer with minimal mass loss.

Unlike natural cometary outgassing—which is chaotic, omnidirectional, and wildly inefficient. The SOEG Model Fully Represents: (CONTROLLED, DIRECTIONAL, OPTIMIZED PROPULSION.)

It’s the engineering solution to interstellar navigation: Using a “magnetofluidic drive” that uses the Sun’s + Nearby Planets & Star energy to activate a propulsion system that was BUILT.

The secret is in the magnetic field. By ionizing the nickel-carbon vapor into a high-velocity plasma jet, the system achieves thrust efficiencies that natural sublimation could never match.

This isn’t science fiction. This is “magnetohydrodynamics” the same physics that powers experimental plasma thrusters being developed by NASA and ESA for deep-space missions.

The difference?

We’re building prototypes…

Someone else already perfected it.

4. The Scientific Statistical Test:

Here’s what makes it undeniable.

Natural comets exhibit HIGH temporal variance in their acceleration parameters.

Technical terms like (A₁) and (A₂) that describe how thrust changes over time. Natural outgassing is messy, chaotic & unpredictable.

Our Prediction:

We formally predict that when sufficient post-perihelion data is published — expected from JUICE observations (data release February 2026) and ground-based telescopes through December 2025— 3I/ATLAS WILL show:

  • (A₂ parameter near zero) — phase-locked rotational coherence.
  • Temporal drift < 0.5σ — stability far beyond natural variance.
  • “Thrust vector alignment” with rotational axis — body-fixed engine signature.

If ALL 3 conditions are met.

The probability that 3I/ATLAS is a natural comet drops below 0.01% (a >4σ statistical rejection).

This is not speculation. This is a time-stamped, falsifiable prediction.

By February — March 2026, we will either be proven right or wrong.

The data doesn’t care about our theories. It only cares about what actually happens.

5. The Blue Hue 🔵:

Now there’s one more piece of evidence—and it’s visible to the naked eye (well, through a telescope). “The Color Anomaly.”

Natural comets scatter sunlight off dust particles, producing a yellowish-red glow. At 1.36 AU from the Sun, 3I/ATLAS should have appeared reddish-orange from thermal emission.

Instead, observers noted something strange: “A distinct blue fluorescence” in the coma.

What Blue Light Means?

Blue emission in a comet’s coma comes from highly ionized species—primarily “CO” (carbon monoxide ions) and certain excited metallic vapors. This requires enormous, “FOCUSED” energy to achieve.

You don’t get this level of ionization from passive solar heating. You get it from ~ Active Plasma Generation. The blue hue is the visible proof of the SOEG engine operating at perihelion. It’s the "engine glow" of a magnetofluidic drive generating high-energy plasma to achieve maximum thrust efficiency.

Compare:
- Natural comets (Hale-Bopp, NEOWISE, 67P, Etc.): Usual Yellowish-red dust scattering.
- Expected for 3I/ATLAS at 1.36 AU: Reddish-orange thermal glow.
- Observed in 3I/ATLAS: Distinct “Blue” plasma fluorescence.

This isn't subtle.

This is the difference between reflected sunlight and an active thruster firing.

5.5 ~ Convergence of Evidence:

Let's put it all together.

The Self-Optimizing Ejection Guidance (SOEG) Model is not speculation. It’s not wild theorizing. It’s one of the only frameworks that coherently explains:

✅ The early arrival— non-gravitational acceleration without natural explanation.

✅ The missing 5.5-billion-ton debris cloud — controlled thrust with minimal mass loss.

✅ The Ni(CO)₄ industrial signature — engineered propulsion chemistry.

✅ The blue plasma glow — active ionization system visible during perihelion.

✅ The statistical impossibility — phase-locked stability beyond natural variance. (pending verification)

However each piece of evidence, standing alone, is anomalous but potentially explainable.

Together, they form an interlocking pattern that demands a technological origin.

But then there’s the Silence.

Venus conjunction: Still offline.

This is not incompetence.

This is recognition.

THEY know something we’re still calculating.

December 19, 2025: 3I/ATLAS reaches closest approach to Earth at 167 million miles.

“If the calculations are correct, the 5.5-billion-ton debris cloud should be impossible to miss. Every telescope on the planet will be watching.”

All of this new information scheduled to be released should definitely include the following: High-resolution spectroscopy, morphological analysis, particle environment data and MOST CRITICALLY the astrometric parameters that will confirm or refute our SOEG model’s predictions.

“If the A₂ parameter shows phase-locked stability, the SOEG model is confirmed.”

Conclusion:

The Numbers Don’t Lie. The orbital path was not set by gravity alone. The acceleration was not powered by ice. The chemistry was not natural. And the timing is not “coincidental.”

3I/ATLAS is a message written in orbital mechanics, plasma physics, and industrial chemistry—a message we have “74 days” left to fully decode.

The mathematics are clear.

The predictions are calculated.

We don't have to speculate about what it is.

We just have to (wait) for the complete data packet to arrive.”

And when it does, one of two things will happen:

Either the natural hypothesis survives (unlikely, given the evidence). Or we confirm what the numbers have been screaming to us since October are TRUE.

Something pushed it. Something controlled it. Something arrived exactly when it needed to.”

Or The A-parameters will lock.

The plasma signature will confirm.

The debris cloud will be absent.

And the institutional silence will make perfect sense.

Because you don’t announce a discovery like this through a press release.

You announce it through a “Calculated Strategy.”

Analogy Conclusion:

The orbital path was set by laws that were not known,
For where the starlight failed, a force was subtly sown.

No dust and ice, but Nickel in the plume’s blue gleam,
A pulse of hidden power, of controlled, forgotten dreams.

The A-Parameter locks, The true secret of the sphere,
The Simultaneous Truth arrives, When all the numbers are near.

— Earth Exists

Additional Reference & Data Source Links 🖇️:

EARTH EXISTS Documentation:
- [Previous article. 35 Days of Silence — 3I/ATLAS]

Source

🙏 Donations Accepted 🙏

If you find value in my content, consider showing your support via:

💳 PayPal: 
1) Simply scan the QR code below 📲
2) or visit https://www.paypal.me/thedinarian


🔗 Crypto Donations👇
XRP: r9pid4yrQgs6XSFWhMZ8NkxW3gkydWNyQX
XLM: GDMJF2OCHN3NNNX4T4F6POPBTXK23GTNSNQWUMIVKESTHMQM7XDYAIZT
XDC: xdcc2C02203C4f91375889d7AfADB09E207Edf809A6

Read full Article
post photo preview
BlackRock Is Manipulating The Price Of Bitcoin👀

Blackrock possess a strategic depth that goes far beyond initial appearances. When the general market perceives selling and traders respond with emotion, these major players are often operating on a much more profound level. They adeptly identify and leverage every available mechanism to influence market dynamics. Their power isn't in direct control of the asset, but in understanding how to move the market without ever taking direct ownership.

What entity has become the most prominent corporate champion of Bitcoin ($BTC)?

It's the one with the massive treasury holdings, known as Microstrategy.

 

However, the major strategic challenge lies here: the size of their Bitcoin position is fundamentally linked to their external financing, typically in the form of debt.

This reliance on significant debt creates an inherent vulnerability—a dependence on creditors and shareholders. When an entity's position is highly leveraged, that dependence makes them susceptible to market manipulation or strategic pressure from external financial forces.

When a highly leveraged corporate holder of a significant asset (like $BTC) faces external financial stress, that pressure inevitably transfers to the asset itself.

Blackrock's goal isn't to induce a market crash, but rather to establish a dominant position and control.

Any substantial sale of major cryptocurrencies like $BTC or $ETH initiated by Blackrock, can be interpreted not as routine trading, but as a deliberate effort to manipulate market sentiment and pricing.

Blackrock is deploying a sophisticated combination of tactics: they simultaneously generate market volatility through strategic sales of the asset ($BTC) while accumulating shares in key corporate holders (the stock symbolized by $MSTR).

The deeper intent is to leverage this equity stake to direct the corporate strategy of the highly leveraged Bitcoin champion.

With a sufficiently large ownership percentage, this influence becomes highly effective. The resulting market power is therefore a function of both manipulating price movement and controlling corporate policy.

Is Microstrategy (the company represented by the $MSTR stock) vulnerable to this kind of pressure? The evidence suggests yes.

A substantial stake held by Blackrock grants them effective leverage to influence and manipulate the company itself.

When the company's shares experience a significant decline, the leadership is often compelled to take action, potentially buying back their own stock. This action is driven by the fact that falling share prices directly intensify financial and market pressure on the entire organization.

If the stock of Microstrategy continues a sustained decline, lenders will inevitably begin to re-evaluate and revise the terms of existing loans. This is a critical point of failure for the entire strategy.

The fundamental operational model of this corporate champion works like a closed loop:

  • It secures debt financing (taking loans) to acquire $BTC.

  • Alternatively, it issues new equity (selling shares) to acquire $BTC.

Crucially, the ongoing interest payments on this substantial debt are often managed by the mechanism of issuing even more shares, creating a continuous cycle of dilution and reliance on a high stock price.

A major consequence of rising leverage is the escalating cost of borrowing, requiring Microstrategy to source even larger amounts of capital.

The most straightforward solution—to issue and sell more stock—proved to be insufficient.

In fact, the situation worsened: the company’s recent attempt to raise funds through a stock offering did not fully sell out. This failure directly resulted in a significant liquidity shortfall, hamstringing Microstrategy’s ability to meet its financial obligations and continue its asset acquisition strategy.

And the ultimate shock came when Microstrategy—the very entity that vowed it would never liquidate its holdings—began to sell.

These weren't insignificant trades; the sales were valued at billions of dollars.

The key question now becomes: Does this sudden, massive reversal signal the imminent collapse of Microstrategy, or is it simply a necessary, albeit drastic, maneuver of 'business as usual' under extreme duress?

There appear to be two primary strategic objectives behind Blackrock's calculated moves:

  • Scenario A (Direct Dominance): Blackrock aims to neutralize its most prominent competitor (the corporate Bitcoin accumulator) in order to seize the title as the largest holder of $BTC.

  • Scenario B (Indirect Control): The institution’s goal is to establish absolute market control and influence, preferring to leverage Microstrategy to execute the most aggressive or politically difficult actions.

The outright financial destruction of Microstrategy is highly improbable. Such an action would trigger a severe market crash that could take years to fully repair.

The far more intelligent strategy is integration and control.

Under this model, Microstrategy remains operational, while Blackrock secretly dictates strategy. This allows Microstrategy to absorb the market blame for any necessary but controversial manipulation, a classic and often dirty tactic used by high-powered financial entities.

In the immediate future, the market will continue to exhibit strong reactions to the strategic maneuvers of Blackrock.

When they execute sales, it instantly captures headlines, is aggressively amplified by the media, and causes fearful retail traders ('weak hands') to panic and exit their positions.

Every decrease in price that results from this panic directly translates into a superior entry point for Blackrock. This clearly illustrates that the current market environment is driven purely by emotion, making it a survival game reserved only for those with the strongest resolve.

In the long run, the nature of $BTC will likely shift, moving away from its original ideals of being completely free and decentralized.

The vast majority of the available supply is projected to become highly concentrated within a small number of major corporations and investment funds.

Consequently, the price cycles will no longer be reliably tied to events like halvings or popular narratives. Instead, they will be driven primarily by government and central bank policy decisions, overarching macroeconomic conditions, and the internal political maneuverings of the world's most dominant funds and corporations.

Blackrock's goal is not to eliminate $BTC; instead, they are focused on constructing an elaborate system of control around the asset.

Microstrategy (the stock symbolized by $MSTR) remains a powerful tool, but it now operates under terms and directives that the company's leadership no longer fully dictates.

Since direct command over the decentralized asset is impossible, control is established through strategic influence over the largest corporate and fund custodians. Moving forward, Blackrock will be the primary entity determining the market's trajectory.

🙏 Donations Accepted 🙏

If you find value in my content, consider showing your support via:

💳 PayPal: 
1) Simply scan the QR code below 📲
2) or visit https://www.paypal.me/thedinarian

🔗 Crypto Donations👇


XRP: r9pid4yrQgs6XSFWhMZ8NkxW3gkydWNyQX
XLM: GDMJF2OCHN3NNNX4T4F6POPBTXK23GTNSNQWUMIVKESTHMQM7XDYAIZT
XDC: xdcc2C02203C4f91375889d7AfADB09E207Edf809A6

Read full Article
post photo preview
A Request for NASA to Release Scientific Data on 3I/ATLAS

During my recent podcast interview with Joe Rogan (accessible here), I had mentioned the unfortunate circumstances, under which NASA had not released for four weeks the images collected by the HiRISE camera onboard the Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter. These images were taken on October 2–3, 2025, when the interstellar object 3I/ATLAS passed within 30 million kilometers from Mars. The images are extremely valuable scientifically because they possess a spatial resolution of 30 kilometers per pixel, about 3 times better than the spatial resolution achieved in the best publicly available image from the Hubble Space Telescope, taken on July 21, 2025 (accessible here and analyzed here). Whereas the Hubble image was taken from an edge-on perspective since Earth and the Sun were separated by only ~10 degrees relative to distant 3I/ATLAS, the HiRISE image offers a sideways perspective, valuable in decoding the mass loss geometry and glow around as it approached the Sun.

The delay in the data release was argued to be the result of the government shutdown on October 1, 2025. Nevertheless, conspiracy theorists suggested that it may have to do with evidence for extraterrestrial intelligence in the HiRISE images. When asked about it, I suggested that the delay is probably not a sign of extraterrestrial intelligence but rather of terrestrial stupidity. We should not hold science hostage to the shutdown politics of the day. The scientific community would have greatly benefited from the dissemination of this time-sensitive data as astronomers plan follow-up observations in the coming months.

Joe Rogan suggested that I contact the interim NASA administrator, Sean Duffy. The following day, I corresponded with congresswoman Anna Paulina Luna regarding a related formal request from NASA. Following our exchange, Representative Luna wrote a brilliant letter to NASA’s acting administrator Duffy.

We all owe a debt of deep gratitude for the visionary support displayed by Representative Luna to frontier science through her letter, attached below.

Avi Loeb is the head of the Galileo Project, founding director of Harvard University’s — Black Hole Initiative, director of the Institute for Theory and Computation at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, and the former chair of the astronomy department at Harvard University (2011–2020). He is a former member of the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology and a former chair of the Board on Physics and Astronomy of the National Academies. He is the bestselling author of “Extraterrestrial: The First Sign of Intelligent Life Beyond Earth” and a co-author of the textbook “Life in the Cosmos”, both published in 2021. The paperback edition of his new book, titled “Interstellar”, was published in August 2024.

Source

🙏 Donations Accepted 🙏

If you find value in my content, consider showing your support via:

💳 PayPal: 
1) Simply scan the QR code below 📲
2) or visit https://www.paypal.me/thedinarian

🔗 Crypto Donations👇
XRP: r9pid4yrQgs6XSFWhMZ8NkxW3gkydWNyQX
XLM: GDMJF2OCHN3NNNX4T4F6POPBTXK23GTNSNQWUMIVKESTHMQM7XDYAIZT
XDC: xdcc2C02203C4f91375889d7AfADB09E207Edf809A6

Read full Article
See More
Available on mobile and TV devices
google store google store app store app store
google store google store app tv store app tv store amazon store amazon store roku store roku store
Powered by Locals