TheDinarian
News • Business • Investing & Finance
Do wholesale CBDCs compete with bank services?
June 16, 2024
post photo preview

Most banks are not keen on retail central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) because they fear it will lure away bank deposits. The recent support by the American Bankers Association for the anti-CBDC Bill is evidence of this. Wholesale CBDCs – the ones only usable by institutions – were considered useful for banks. However, some institutions are keener than others, often depending on the application of the wholesale CBDC. Executives in the securities services sector are usually the most enthusiastic. On the payments side, JP Morgan’s Umar Farooq appeared to have reservations during last month’s Consensus event.

The advantage of using a wholesale CBDC is that it enables interbank and securities settlement in central bank money rather than commercial bank money, which comes with counterparty risk.

Currently interbank settlement has come to the fore as several initiatives have started to explore tokenized deposits, allowing for bank-backed programmable payments. Tokenized deposit payments between banks have two legs. There’s the customer token transfer from one bank to another and another leg where the banks settle between themselves. This is done either through a real time gross settlement (RTGS) system or ideally with a wholesale CBDC.

Mr Farooq, who leads Onyx by JP Morgan, the bank’s blockchain division, and is the new co-lead of payments, discussed using a CBDC in this context. “I think CBDC could be a mechanism for that, but I don’t think it’s the only mechanism,” he mentioned the possibility of a live clearing system. “It (wholesale CBDC) is an option. I’m not sure it’s the best possible option.”

Meanwhile, tokenized deposits can be used for domestic transactions, but one of the most promising use cases is cross border.

Project Agorá

The BIS recently launched Project Agorá involving seven central banks and commercial banks collaborating to enhance the existing international correspondent banking system. Practically, it aims to streamline compliance and enable instant cross border settlement using tokenization.

A strategic goal is to attract more banks to provide correspondent banking services. There’s been a major contraction in both the number of correspondent banks and the currency corridors, which has particularly impacted certain emerging markets. The BIS (CPMI) found that in the Americas (excluding North America), between 2011 and 2022 the number of active correspondents almost halved (-47%). Oceania was down 38%, and Africa and Europe declined 34%. For US dollars, the figures were even more stark. During the same period, the proportion of emerging markets currency foreign exchange trading has roughly doubled.

At a big picture level, the obvious institution Agorá could potentially disrupt is the interbank messaging system, Swift. However, there are other initiatives it could also usurp. Agorá is most similar to Partior, the cross border payments initiative co-founded by JP Morgan, DBS and Temasek, with Standard Chartered joining later.

The consortium challenge

JP Morgan’s Farooq commented during Consensus discussions about Agorá, “No disrespect to any central bank or any commercial bank, but you put twenty of those in a room and try to build something, the chances of that being built are slim if you’re an optimist.”

That might sound like a provocative statement targeted at Agorá. However, Mr Farooq has previously expressed similar comments about consortia in general, based on his experience.

A couple of years ago, he outlined the concept of Metcalfe’s law – that the more participants the greater the network effect. However, he noted it’s the opposite for consortia. He proposed the ‘Inverse Metcalfe Law of Innovation in Consortia’ – The probability of delivering a truly innovative product/solution is inversely proportional to the square of the number of organizations involved in a consortium. So one company on it's own is one hundred times more likely to deliver an innovative solution than a ten company consortium. He argued the only way for consortia to work is to let one or two leaders drive without interference.

That’s why Partior had a small number of participants at the outset. It grew out of JP Morgan’s work on Singapore’s Project Ubin for CBDC.

Agorá competes with Partior?

When we first understood Agorá’s focus on correspondent banking, Partior was the closest initiative we thought of. The Partior network is already up and running, although it is still in its early stages.

In other words, Partior also performs compliance upfront and uses tokenization for multicurrency payments. The key benefits are that banks can link to Partior’s correspondent network to enable almost instant payments 24/7 for their clients. However, the settlement banks that enable the other banks also have to settle up between themselves. Currently, in Partior they still do so in a conventional manner, whereas a wholesale CBDC might benefit that aspect.

Apart from Partior, we’d speculate that JP Morgan might have another reason to be less keen on initiatives like Agorá. We highlighted the contraction in correspondent banking which means competition has reduced. In a scenario with less competition and a growing volume of transactions, the remaining players have prospered, and none more so than JP Morgan. It ranks number one in payments amongst the largest investment banks, number one in US dollar payments volume and has a 27.1% market share in Swift US dollar payments. During 2023 it averaged $9.7 trillion in daily payments.

Hence, if Agorá succeeds in increasing competition, it could reduce some of the competitive advantages in international payments of the larger settlement banks. At the same time, if it achieves its goals it will provide new opportunities for other banks and hopefully reduce costs for end users.

Wholesale CBDC competes with Fnality

Another solution that competes with wholesale CBDC is Fnality, backed by twenty financial institutions. It effectively provides a synthetic CBDC because its settlement token is backed by member bank deposits held in an omnibus central bank account. We’d argue that any major jurisdiction that launches a wholesale CBDC would reduce the need for Fnality.

Fnality provides a powerful solution for low risk settlement. Plenty of jurisdictions don’t want to launch a wholesale CBDC in the near term. That might be because it is a political hot potato, as in the United States. Other jurisdictions, such as Germany, want to see actual demand before going to the expense of developing one.

However, some executives in the securities services sector view Fnality as a strong interim solution but prefer a wholesale CBDC. That’s because Fnality still has some counterparty risk, even though it’s a small one. The fact that so many institutions have backed Fnality means that all don’t share that view.

With Swift, Partior and Fnality we’ve shown that a wholesale CBDC can be a competitor. However, it isn’t always the case. Many wholesale CBDC use cases can be a commercial bank enabler.

Tokenized deposits: Wholesale CBDC as a bank enabler

One example is DREX, Brazil’s pilot wholesale CBDC initiative, which provides a wholesale CBDC for interbank settlement of tokenized deposits. Banco Central do Brasil has an ambitious goal to create an open banking-style environment leveraging tokenization for investments and credit. It, too, is keen to encourage competition.

The tokenized deposits will be used for programmable payments and the settlement of securities transactions. Not only is it providing a platform and framework for banks to engage in tokenized deposits and tokenization more broadly, but it’s putting banks at the center. Hence, banks can provide wallets, allowing them to harness their client relationships as the future of finance evolves.

Stepping back, we’ve touched on three specific examples. However, at a big picture level, the objective of wholesale CBDC is to reduce risk. Instant settlement in central bank money for a wider range of applications could take a significant amount of risk out of the banking and capital markets system. If banks are subject to less risk, it might allow them to be more expansive in other areas.

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
🔑Blockchain lowers barriers so that everyone wins🔑

With BENJI, Franklin Templeton used the Stellar network to bring its money market fund onchain, reducing the minimum investment from $2,500 to just $25.

Denelle Dixon breaks down what this means for access and inclusion on Thinking Crypto Podcast with Tony Edward.

00:00:39
🤔ON FOX NEWS? One Has To Wonder... WHY NOW?🤔

ARE WE ALONE? Tonight on @SpecialReport a look at a new documentary on UAP's and what government officials may know about top secret programs.

00:07:02
🚨 The convergence of crypto and traditional finance is accelerating the Internet of Value 🚨

Institutional payments. Secure asset custody. Regulated stablecoins. Everything onchain.

It's happening: the convergence of crypto and traditional finance is accelerating the Internet of Value.

That’s a wrap for Ripple Swell 2025. We’ll see you next year, NYC! 🗽

00:01:41
👉 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

Three massive stablecoin announcements in the past 48 hours ⚡

1. JPMorganChase 𝗹𝗲𝘁𝘀 𝗰𝗹𝗶𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀 𝘀𝘄𝗮𝗽 𝗝𝗣𝗠𝗗 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗨𝗦𝗗𝗖 𝗼𝗻 𝗕𝗮𝘀𝗲

• JPMD = JPM's permissoned bank deposit token
• Previously institutions would redeem JPMD back into fiat in a bank account, staying inside of the JPM ecosystem; now they can swap between JPMD to USDC on Base, and from there hold or send
→ Meaning: Falling barrier to institutions bringing big $ onchain

2. Visa 𝗽𝗶𝗹𝗼𝘁𝘀 𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗯𝗹𝗲𝗰𝗼𝗶𝗻 𝗽𝗮𝘆𝗼𝘂𝘁𝘀

• Select partners can fund payouts in fiat to creators and gig-workers in USD-backed stablecoins
• "Stablecoin" was mentioned 25 times in Visa's Q4 earnings call; stablecoin-linked card spend was up 4X YoY and total settlement volume reached $2.5B annualized
→ Meaning: The largest card network in the world is speedrunning cheaper, faster global payments, now directly to...

post photo preview
🚨JPMorgan Launches JPMD On Base🚨

💭JPMorgan launches JPMD on Base, and the debate inside banking circles heats up once more.

Every time a bank tokenizes money, the same question surfaces: 👉 What really separates a Stablecoin from a Deposit Token?

🔎On the surface, they look identical — both live on blockchain, move instantly, and can be programmed to follow business logic. But underneath, they represent two very different philosophies of money.

💵 Stablecoins (like USDC or PYUSD) are issued by fintechs and backed by cash or T-bills. They operate like digitized stored value — moving freely across wallets, exchanges, and DeFi. Think of them as digital cash in circulation — liquid, open, and borderless.

🏦 Deposit Tokens (like JPMD) are issued by banks and represent real deposits on the bank's balance sheet. They don't trade in DeFi or open markets; they move within permissioned, regulated rails — built for settlement, treasury, and intraday liquidity. In simple terms, they are tokenized ledger balances, not a new ...

post photo preview

🚨 XRP ETF DAY 1 PERFORMANCE SURPRISES TRADERS ON NASDAQ 🚨

The Canary XRP ETF (XRPC) made its debut on Nasdaq, marking a historic moment as the first spot XRP ETF to trade in the US. The Day 1 performance surprised traders with strong initial volume and price action, though it closed slightly below its opening price.

🔑 Key Points

  • Historic Launch: The Canary XRP ETF (XRPC) began trading on Nasdaq on November 13, 2025, becoming the first spot XRP ETF in the US after receiving final approval from the SEC. The fund attracted an inflow of $6.4 million on its first day, indicating strong investor interest.

  • Trading Volume: The fund saw approximately $134 million in trading volume on Day 1 across Nasdaq and CBOE exchanges, representing about 53.6 million shares changing hands. This robust volume surprised many traders who had modest expectations for the launch.

  • Price Performance: XRPC started trading at $24.44, briefly peaked at $26.7, before closing at $23.9—down 2.3% from ...

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