Lido’s Market Share Plummets as Coinbase Enters Liquid Staking Market

• Lido’s market share has declined significantly due to the entry of Coinbase into the liquid staking derivatives market.
• The number of new ETH staked deposits on Lido decreased, due to competitors offering better APR rates.
• The percentage of large holders of LDO decreased and network growth of the token was also affected.

The advent of Coinbase into the liquid staking derivatives market has had a significant impact on Lido’s market share, resulting in a drastic decline in their share of the market. According to Delphi Digital’s recent data, Lido’s market share has dropped from 85% to 73%. This can be attributed to the fact that Coinbase’s entry into the market provided customers with more competitive APR rates than Lido could provide.

The interest in staking ETH with Lido has also decreased, resulting in the number of new staked deposits on Lido falling from 80% to less than 40%. This can be attributed to the fact that competing platforms such as Frax Finance have been able to provide customers with higher APR rates than Lido, meaning customers have opted for them instead.

The activity of staked ETH has also been affected, with Santiment’s data showing that the percentage of large holders of LDO has decreased significantly over the last month. Furthermore, the network growth of the token has also decreased, indicating that new users were not buying LDO at its current price.

All of the above factors have had a negative impact on Lido’s market share and token value, resulting in investors fleeing the platform. It remains to be seen how the platform will respond to the current situation and whether it will be able to make a comeback in the liquid staking derivatives market.

Dogecoin Spikes After Elon Musk’s McDonald’s Tweet: Is Profitability Next?

• Dogecoin price spiked after Elon Musk’s tweet about accepting Dogecoin at McDonald’s.
• Dogecoin’s social mentions and engagements increased due to the increased attention from the tweet.
• The increase in long positions and the MVRV ratio suggested that Dogecoin holders could potentially sell their holdings for a profit.

Dogecoin, a meme-coin created in 2013 as a parody of Bitcoin, has been gaining a lot of attention lately. This is mainly due to the recent tweet by tech mogul Elon Musk, who mentioned that he would be interested in eating McDonald’s if Dogecoin was accepted as a valid form of payment by the American multinational fast food chain. This tweet created a stir on social media, with many speculating about the potential impact of the tweet on the price of the meme coin.

As a result, Dogecoin’s price spiked unexpectedly soon after the 25 January tweet. Traders remained optimistic despite potential short-term selling pressure. On the morning of 29 January, Dogecoin was trending on Twitter. In fact, there was even a spike in its social volume metric. This increase in attention led to a corresponding increase in Dogecoin’s social mentions and engagements. According to data from LunarCrush, Doge’s social mentions grew by 4% over the last week.

Furthermore, the number of long positions on Dogecoin continued to increase. This, coupled with the MVRV ratio, suggested that many Dogecoin holders may have the opportunity to sell their holdings for a profit. The negative long/short difference further suggested that these profitable addresses belonged to short-term holders. This could potentially cause a negative impact on DOGE in the future.

Despite the potential risk, interest in Dogecoin remains high. Even the McDonald’s team joined in on the activity, further fueling speculation. With the price of Dogecoin continuing to rise, it remains to be seen if McDonald’s will accept Dogecoin as a valid form of payment. Until then, traders and investors will remain optimistic about the potential of Dogecoin.

Centre freezes an Ethereum address containing USD 100,000

Centre, the company that issues the stablecoin USD Coin (USDC) has blacklisted an Ethereum address with $100,000 in USDC in response to a law enforcement request. For the first time, the „blacklist (investor’s address)“ function was activated for an address on June 16, 2020.

It is not yet clear why the law enforcement request was made, but the Consortium Centre, founded by Circle and Coinbase, issued a statement confirming the blacklisting:

„Centre can confirm that it blacklisted an address in response to a law enforcement request While we cannot comment on the details of law enforcement requests, Centre complies with binding court orders that have appropriate jurisdiction over the organization“.

An uncertain future for private stablecoins according to Petter Dittus

A known thief
Although Circle spokesman Josh Hawkins said he could not give details of the blacklisting, it appears that the address may be involved in other crypt robberies.

In the comments section of a different address, a user claims that the owner of the blacklisted address stole other tokens from him:

„Hello unknown thief, you are in contact with this address of eth 0xEeC84548aAd50A465963bB501e39160c58366692 and you have stolen 10,000 Loopring Coin (750 euros) from my purse. Now I’m giving you the chance to give me back my 10,000 Loopring Coin. You know my eth address. If you don’t, I’ll report you anywhere with your two known addresses.

An Israeli blockchain company says they invented a button to „undo“ Bitcoin transactions

They’re all the same.
Last week the USDC broke the record of a $1 billion market cap, becoming the second largest stablecoin after Tether (USDT), and Twitter users compare stablecoins to centralized trust currencies, suggesting that what happens to USDC can happen to any other stablecoin.

Another user stated that Dai (DAI) could solve this centralized control problem, however, he also refuted the fact that DAI is backed by USDC and other centrally controlled digital currencies.

EOS cancels previously confirmed transactions while experts denounce centralization
It’s about censorship
Normally, the funds that are kept in the Bitcoin Circuit blockchain are controlled by the owner of the address, however, in relation to USDC, an address can be blacklisted which restricts you from executing transactions (sending or receiving) through the USDC smart contract. Although technically reversible, the Circle website warns that blacklisted addresses may be „totally and permanently unrecoverable.

This has raised concerns in the community about censorship, and one user complained on Reddit:

„Central government control and censorship is only going to get worse.“

Another user commented on Twitter that the „C“ in USDC „means objectionable“.