blockarrow.eth retweeted
🚨JUST IN: Mirae Asset, with more than $1 trillion in client AUM, has issued tokenized funding notes on @Solana through its Hong Kong securities arm under a $3B structured note program.
The issuance was supported by the Solana Foundation and Marketnode.
blockarrow.eth retweeted
a lot of this is dead wrong. dead dead wrong, which is annoying bc i'm a big fan of tulip king
like yes when someone buys tokens the price goes up. EPS increases when you lower the share count. that's about as far as the accuracy in this post goes. you still have to pay cash to retire the shares so there's no additional shareholder wealth that's created. it's straight modigliani-miller, nothing crazy here
the papers cited don't reinforce any point he's making here - for the most part these papers report instances where DESPITE the fact that buybacks shoudn't increase shareholder value, it seems that stocks go up -- but then the proper attribution is stuff like management buying stocks when they’re undervalued and the market rewarding it, not "we bought the stock and wow looks like everyone got free money." stock buybacks are just cash management, and these papers are documenting good cash management leading to good outcomes. buybacks don't just naturally make stockholders richer
the post does touch on the critical difference in rights between equity and tokens but then tries to extend the logic of proportional ownership from stock to tokens. But tokens aren't apple or autozone. apple and autozone are buying actual ownership claims on their businesses. when they retire shares, the remaining shareholders own more of the actual thing. But tokens don't have any claim to a business; changing the share count means nothing. if i owned 15% of nothing and now i own 20% of nothing, i still own nothing.
what i think he's circling around is that token buybacks are a way to *synthesize* a claim to cash flows that holders otherwise don't have. This is interesting and important.
stock buybacks take cash that stockholders already owned and distributes to them. no wealth is created. but token buybacks take cash that tokenholders had no claim to and gives it to some of the tokenholders. if people believe that this will keep happening, the tokens have value in expectation. that is *new wealth created* to tokenholders, an actual transfer of economic value from whoever actually held the revenue before
these are crucial differences that have little to do with the arguments that tulip king is making but everything to do with how to understand token buybacks. i agree with the conclusion that buybacks are a valuable thing but they're not categorically correct or even necessarily the most efficient mechanism
The value of these buybacks is highly conditional on stuff like the perceived durability of the buyback program, market liquidity, etc. –– and a dollar of buybacks doesn't necessarily translate to a dollar of shareholder value. so the design of the program is really important because it's the difference between a buyback program offering real economic exposure to a business and being a total flop that makes everyone upset
and ofc i'm not even getting into the grow vs distribute dilemma that underlies equityholders' issues with distributions
i really need to write something more formal on this
I so desperately want to end the psyop that buybacks don't work:
1. Mechanically speaking, buybacks make the price go up
2. Crypto is not TradFi, there is a different social contract
> The Mechanical Value of Buybacks
First there's a large number of studies that confirm basic intuitions:
* Market Underreaction to Open Market Share Repurchases NBER (1995) - Buybacks create long term value, especially for underpriced stocks
* The Nature and Persistence of Buyback Anomalies (2009) - Reaffirms buybacks create persistent abnormal positive returns. They have an especially positive effect smoothing over price dips when the market overreacts to bad new
* Actual Share Repurchases, Price Efficiency, and the Information Content of Stock Prices (2017) - Reaffirms the findings of the 2009 paper. Buybacks improve pricing efficiency, liquidity, and are especially positive during market declines
* Pavilion Global Markets Buybacks Drive S&P 500 Returns (2023) - Buybacks can drive up to 43% of the returns in a single stock
tldr: buybacks make the number go up. obviously they work better when your stock is at a lower p/e because of under appreciation or market downturns unrelated to the core business, but nonetheless they are positive on the stock
THIS SHOULD BE REALLY OBVIOUS, you don't even need to read any of the papers above to understand the basic intuitions of why they work:
* Price is a function of supply and demand. When buybacks take supply off the market, price goes up all else held equal
* When shares get taken off the market, the shares you hold represent a larger share of the business meaning you benefit from EPS growth even if revenue isn't growing (let alone if it is)
* Businesses providing constant single sided buys on their own shares has a smoothing effect on liquidity making deeps shallower and setting higher price floors in the long run (more shares are repurchased on a fixed buying program when price is lower)
Some specific examples:
* about 51% of Apple's EPS growth is credited to their legendary buyback program retiring so many outstanding shares
* Autozone has bought back like 90% of their shares - the stock has had double the annualized returns of the SP for the last 2 decades
* Home Depot is similar to Autozone
What crypto people get uncomfortable is that buybacks take a long time to compound. This is totally fine in the stock market where there's many businesses you can forecast out in to the future for a decade+. In crypto I understand this rightfully makes people nervous
One prime example of this would be PONS. It kinda doesn't matter how much %of supply was bought back by PONS if their business never recovers. The entire trade/business may end up being too much a flash-in-the-pan for the long term effect of buybacks to have compounded
But we're now seeing a few crypto businesses start to cross the chasm into multi-cycle success stories. We can & should expect the businesses to implement long durable buyback programs that will compound excess positive returns for the years to come
> The importance of buybacks in crypto
I don't know if any of you noticed this, but you have no legal protections as token holders. It's also not even on any government roadmap to fix this
Regulators are just now getting around to setting some guidelines for crypto projects to not get sued - but even then, none of those guidelines relate to you. You do not have voting rights. You do not have legal recourse. In fact most times you don't even own equity in the underlying businesses which actually collect the revenues
IF token holders had legal rights. IF I could sue Compound or Aave for what they've done to token holders, I'd be far more sympathetic to the argument that teams should wait for buybacks. At the end of the day, I know I'd be able to pursue legal recourse & pressure with like minded token holders to force them to return capital when the time is right
Unfortunately, you have none of these abilities. You have nothing but the promises of the team. IN FACT, a team that likely ran a points program or other to WIN YOUR BUSINESS by trading some of their equity. I'd argue they have a moral responsibility to you to show they're aligned in the long term with you even in the lack of regulatory requirements
BREAKING: Alphabet is securing its own digital assets on Solana.
Google unveils Google Multi-Party Compute today, an institutional custody system now in private preview with major financial institutions. Commercial launch early 2027.
blockarrow.eth retweeted
It's so easy to replicate cryptanalysis results and riff on them these days.
blockarrow.eth retweeted
This is absolutely insane for solana:So11111111111111111111111111111111111111112
blockarrow.eth retweeted
Also should note Pearl's daily token issuance is roughly $1.4 million a day Vs. 30-40k per day for base:0x9b5e262cf9bb04869ab40b19af91d2dc85761722.
Nock also has its version of a halving event (Issuance decay) in 20ish days so that will decrease daily token issuance even further.
Replying to @fejau_inc
$NOCK is the superior PoUW play. Proof based money.
I’ll give credit to the pearl community for their marketing but the market will realize Nock is superior tech, has a larger TAM and trades at a much more reasonable Val
blockarrow.eth retweeted
Went live today with Jonah talking about Proof-based Money and Useful AI work on @Nockchain.
Thanks @JonahBlake for having me!
We will be chatting with @loganallc the creator of @nockchain today
Topic: AI moneyness and VS. PRL
Also topics later
-IMD token
-hype and token 2049
-memeplays
-perps
-zcash lobby
-yield field look
-higgspad weekend
-revenue
-my new ai setup/ai talk
join us!
blockarrow.eth retweeted
Moneyness is an emergent property. Money is a Schelling point for value storage, exchange, and accounting.
A system of coinage may achieve Moneyness if a growing network of people use it to store, exchange, and account for a stable or increasing amount of value over time.
Storing value requires credible security. Exchanging value benefits from speed, ease, and flexibility. Accounting benefits from neutral immutability and lindyness.
Digital money has some key benefits: neutral security can be proven, transfer can occur globally and quickly, and smart contracts can provide flexible, programmable constructs for interacting with value.
Digital coins aiming at achieving Moneyness have converged to two primary shapes:
- PoW, hard-capped supply coins with no pre-mine
- PoS, pre-mined coins with flexible supply, inflation with burn mechanics to offset
Moneyness is built up over time by a network of people using a coin; it isn’t achieved overnight.
I strongly believe that PoW-shaped networks are the best candidates for global acceptance as Money.
I began working on $NOCK back in 2023. I modeled the @Nockchain design after my good friend (Akis Kattis)’s 2020 research paper called Proof of Necessary Work, which imagined a PoUW network built on top of Zero Knowledge Proofs.
Our team launched @Nockchain with no pre-mine in May of 2025, and we quickly became the largest ZK-proving network in the world (though the proofs being generated are not yet used by the network).
We’re moving quickly toward privacy and programmability, all built on the same Proofs that secure the network.
This summer we launched our AI Compute Network, which has 25 ExaMAC/s of compute and is presently merge-mining ~55% of Pearl blocks. We’re continuing research on making the AI Compute Network into useful verifiable inference.
I’m happy to see more teams joining the Proof of Useful Work space. It’s good for the future of crypto for attention to be moving toward this important area of research.
The question of Moneyness is a long game and will play out over time. Really, these economic experiments will be proven out through distribution over the course of years and decades.
Replying to @MoonRegolith_ @loganallc
I think trying to do all those things at once is exactly why it’s not money, programmability & complexity is -EV for money
Somewhere in the bear market, "what's the revenue multiple" replaced "how big can this get."
Revenue matters. But valuing crypto on today's fees is like valuing the internet on 1997 ad spend.
Mert gets it.
solana:So11111111111111111111111111111111111111112
the midcurving on SOL comes from a profound cynicism about crypto's future
what's going to happen is that crypto adoption is going to 100x
it will not just be perps, or RWAs, or memes -- it will be all of it
the totality of old finance combined with the weirdness of new finance, at planetary scale
and at that game, Solana is king
to that effect, one framing I've been riffing on: SOL is new money
'new' is a powerful & optimistic word -- it represents possibility and the infinite, rather than marginally optimizing spreadsheet accounting
it is too early in the game to treat novel internet money as it were a derivative of Costco stock. blockchains that scale are barely 2-3 years old
it's 2004, you can opt for JP Morgan or you can go for Apple
neither are wrong, but one is more optimistic
blockarrow.eth retweeted
alpenglow, a complete consensus rewrite for solana, went from whitepaper to testnet in ~1.5 years? and to mainnet within the next few weeks? on a ~$75B network?
no one ships like solana



























