Polymarketwhere is the dispute
where is the dispute
okie参与话题 2消息总数 29
该用户的聊天记录定位。
聊天记录
共 29 条，显示第 1-29 条
HyperliquidThere is an important fairness question around TradeXYZ $SPCX. The contract appears to have originally used an ~11.87B SpaceX share-count basis, while the latest disclosed estimate is ~13.08B. Same company valuation, different denominator = different per-share price. If the market/mark price shifts to the new basis without adjusting existing positions, holders may take a mechanical loss unrelated to SpaceX’s valuation. This is not a trading call. It is a contract-spec transparency issue. TradeXYZ should clarify publicly: Has $SPCX moved from the 11.87B basis to 13.08B? If yes, were existing positions adjusted? If no, how will the post-IPO oracle preserve the original basis?
There is an important fairness question around TradeXYZ $SPCX. The contract appears to have originally used an ~11.87B SpaceX share-count basis, while the latest disclosed estimate is ~13.08B. Same company valuation, different denominator = different per-share price. If the market/mark price shifts to the new basis without adjusting existing positions, holders may take a mechanical loss unrelated to SpaceX’s valuation. This is not a trading call. It is a contract-spec transparency issue. TradeXYZ should clarify publicly: Has $SPCX moved from the 11.87B basis to 13.08B? If yes, were existing positions adjusted? If no, how will the post-IPO oracle preserve the original basis?
There is an important fairness question around TradeXYZ $SPCX. The contract appears to have originally used an ~11.87B SpaceX share-count basis, while the latest disclosed estimate is ~13.08B. Same company valuation, different denominator = different per-share price. If the market/mark price shifts to the new basis without adjusting existing positions, holders may take a mechanical loss unrelated to SpaceX’s valuation. This is not a trading call. It is a contract-spec transparency issue. TradeXYZ should clarify publicly: Has $SPCX moved from the 11.87B basis to 13.08B? If yes, were existing positions adjusted? If no, how will the post-IPO oracle preserve the original basis?
There is an important fairness question around TradeXYZ $SPCX. The contract appears to have originally used an ~11.87B SpaceX share-count basis, while the latest disclosed estimate is ~13.08B. Same company valuation, different denominator = different per-share price. If the market/mark price shifts to the new basis without adjusting existing positions, holders may take a mechanical loss unrelated to SpaceX’s valuation. This is not a trading call. It is a contract-spec transparency issue. TradeXYZ should clarify publicly: Has $SPCX moved from the 11.87B basis to 13.08B? If yes, were existing positions adjusted? If no, how will the post-IPO oracle preserve the original basis?
study this folks https://x.com/BroLeon/status/2064149463153942788
study this folks https://x.com/BroLeon/status/2064149463153942788
yes a quick mental exercise for everyone - if 99:1 split the share price drops by factor of 100. if u are long GOO NIGHT
yes a quick mental exercise for everyone - if 99:1 split the share price drops by factor of 100. if u are long GOO NIGHT
very diff from what they said at the start when they launched it their oracle != nance oracle
very diff from what they said at the start when they launched it their oracle != nance oracle
move on folks , move to nance or aster, who are crystal clear on their rebasing and not sacmming
move on folks , move to nance or aster, who are crystal clear on their rebasing and not sacmming
'market implied'
'market implied'
maybe they are shprt?
maybe they are shprt?
https://x.com/Aster_DEX/status/2064341339949732263 aster rebaseing
https://x.com/Aster_DEX/status/2064341339949732263 aster rebaseing
enjoy this tweet which explaned the arb https://x.com/BroLeon/status/2064149463153942788
enjoy this tweet which explaned the arb https://x.com/BroLeon/status/2064149463153942788
basically nance won by rebasing, leaving arb trade (loser on hl longs). sharp traders arbed ity by longing nance and shorting hl
basically nance won by rebasing, leaving arb trade (loser on hl longs). sharp traders arbed ity by longing nance and shorting hl
lol spacex market on tradexyz really big L, nance won this battle fr
lol spacex market on tradexyz really big L, nance won this battle fr
sure enjoy losing free money on no rebases on 'house of all finance'
sure enjoy losing free money on no rebases on 'house of all finance'
switch to nance.. almost 15usd differnce
switch to nance.. almost 15usd differnce
and u forgot they are NOT rebasing hence the discount...
and u forgot they are NOT rebasing hence the discount...
I tjink we need tradexyz founder to reply us .... not hl team
I tjink we need tradexyz founder to reply us .... not hl team
can u share any reference to the original documentation saying rebase ?
can u share any reference to the original documentation saying rebase ?
i tink this doesnt asnwer the qn whether longers get more shares to rebase i checked with gtp 5.5 too they think tradexyz longers got hit by denom/spec repricing
i tink this doesnt asnwer the qn whether longers get more shares to rebase i checked with gtp 5.5 too they think tradexyz longers got hit by denom/spec repricing
thanks for responses all. im just confused why 1:1 correlatin completey broke since last night, especialy since that is when the binance rebase announcement came out
thanks for responses all. im just confused why 1:1 correlatin completey broke since last night, especialy since that is when the binance rebase announcement came out
the way its trading implies tradexyz is gonna soft rug users while nance is crystal clear on rebase
the way its trading implies tradexyz is gonna soft rug users while nance is crystal clear on rebase
so tradexyz right? how do we ping them?
so tradexyz right? how do we ping them?
so bascailly this is saying hl will rug users? while binance wouldnt?
so bascailly this is saying hl will rug users? while binance wouldnt?
if team and tradexyz dont fix this it will be fud - this is spread between nance and hl spacex - this implies rebase not done properly on HL?
if team and tradexyz dont fix this it will be fud - this is spread between nance and hl spacex - this implies rebase not done properly on HL?
Doesnt answer the qn. So wheb the actual share count comes out will hl users longing spacex get rekt?
Doesnt answer the qn. So wheb the actual share count comes out will hl users longing spacex get rekt?
Can someone from hl team address this?
Can someone from hl team address this?
Seems like nance spa ex price trading way above hl spacex. something is off with hl spacex
Seems like nance spa ex price trading way above hl spacex. something is off with hl spacex
Well eventually on Friday it will be arbed? So start capturing it now?
Well eventually on Friday it will be arbed? So start capturing it now?
Why is spacex perp price on HL so diff from binance when both use the same share count?
Why is spacex perp price on HL so diff from binance when both use the same share count?