Don’t Miss a Post. Subscribe now.

Solana Crpto (SOL) is Faster, More Energy Efficient, and Soon to Be Delisted

Solana Tokens Continue Steep Slide 

CoinDesk reports Solana Tokens Continue Steep Slide While Major Cryptos Stay Flat

Crypto markets slid a nominal 0.8% in the past 24 hours as broader equity markets grappled with renewed coronavirus fears stemming from China. Solana (SOL), however, dropped as much as 10% in the past 24 hours, adding to a 20% slide over the past week. Thursday’s decline put SOL on track for nine straight days of losses, the longest run of declines since Sept. 17, 2021, based on Messari data.

Since 2020, Bankman-Fried has been a major proponent of the Solana network, launching the decentralized exchange Serum on the then-upstart network and investing heavily in the platform’s projects.

Apart from prices, the value locked on Solana-based applications has declined 98% since November last year, DefiLlama data shows. Steep falls in Solana’s metrics came after the implosion of Terra network in May and a market-wide drop in July and after Bankman-Fried’s FTX problems first came to light early last month.

$50 Billion Crypto Wipeout

CNBC reports Solana’s Slide Accelerates — $50 Billion in Value Wiped Out in 2022

Among Solana’s biggest problems in late 2022 was its close relationship to FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried, who faces eight criminal fraud charges after his crypto exchange went bankrupt last month. The disgraced former crypto billionaire was one of Solana’s most public boosters, touting the advantages of the blockchain technology and investing over a half-billion dollars in Solana tokens.

Bankman-Fried’s companies held nearly $1.2 billion worth of the token and associated assets in June, according to documents reviewed by CoinDesk.

In the last week, Solana has declined over 30%. Ether has held steady, shedding 1.7% in the same time period, while bitcoin has only dropped 1.2%. Among the 20 most-valuable cryptocurrencies tracked by CoinMarketCap, the next biggest loser over that stretch is Dogecoin, which has fallen 9%.

Bitcoin uses a proof-of-work mechanism. Ethereum and rival Solana use proof-of-stake. Rather than relying on energy-intensive mining, proof-of-stake systems ask big users to offer up collateral, or stake, to become “validators.” Instead of solving for a cryptographic hash, as with bitcoin, proof-of-work validators verify transaction activity and maintain the blockchain’s “books,” in exchange for a proportional cut of transaction fees.

Solana’s supposed differentiating factor was augmenting proof-of-stake with proof-of-history — the ability to prove that a transaction happened at a particular moment.

Proof of History, Proof of Work, Proof of Stake

Proof of work and proof of stake use algorithms to validate cryptocurrency on a blockchain network. The main difference is how they choose and qualify users to add transactions.

TechTarget has a nice explainer article Proof of work vs. proof of stake: What’s the difference?

Bitcoin operates on a proof of work concept which is very energy intensive.  

SOL claims to offer Proof of History on top of Proof of Stake. OK, so what? How does anything but hype explain the meteoric rise from $1 to $259. 

SOL Delisting 

https://twitter.com/TheCryptoRss/status/1608848509180022787

How Many Cryptos Are There?

CoinMarketCap says there are approximately 21,910 cryptocurrencies as of Dec 7, 2022.

What a hoot!

Each of those cryptocurrencies claims to do something better, cheaper, or more efficient. 

Many cryptos promise preposterous returns on staked coins, paid of course in crypos not US dollars. You make 50% or whatever paid in worthless tokens so you lose it all. 

DogeCoin was started as a joke. Of the 21,910 cryptos, they are nearly all a joke. 

Some would suggest every one of them is a joke. Others say they are all a joke except Bitcoin and Ethereum.

Finally, Bitcoin “maxis” believe they are all worthless except Bitcoin. 

At any given moment, they are all worth what they are worth provided you can cash out. With staked coins you are stuck. 

SOL is down 96% but it can fall 50% or 100% from here. Given delisting announcements, why shouldn’t it fall to zero?

Dear Lord, Send Help

Overall, with liquidity shrinking, Fed hiking, and a clear shift in sentiment, the $1,000,000 price tag people put on Bitcoin seems more preposterous than ever.

Cathie Wood has has that target for Bitcoin as discussed in Dear Lord Send Help, the Ark is Sinking and Tesla With It.

This post originated on MishTalk.Com.

Thanks for Tuning In!

Please Subscribe to MishTalk Email Alerts.

Subscribers get an email alert of each post as they happen. Read the ones you like and you can unsubscribe at any time.

If you have subscribed and do not get email alerts, please check your spam folder.

Mish

Subscribe to MishTalk Email Alerts.

Subscribers get an email alert of each post as they happen. Read the ones you like and you can unsubscribe at any time.

This post originated on MishTalk.Com

Thanks for Tuning In!

Mish

Comments to this post are now closed.

22 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
RonJ
RonJ
3 years ago
“SOL is down 96%…”
Kind of like the dollar since the FED was created, but SOL got there faster.
TheCaptain
TheCaptain
3 years ago
How is cathie wood any different from SBF’s idiot geeky girlfriend?
I always said wood was going to be the next Abby Joseph Cohen or Meredith Whitney of the world. They got lucky and then are carried around on everyone’s shoulders like they know something special but what they never seem to understand is how to quit the gambling if you are ahead. Because he closed his short fund and returned the profits to investor gamblers in early 2009, Bill Fleckenstein has always had my respect as someone who understands the cyclicality of markets and how not to overplay your hand.
StukiMoi
StukiMoi
3 years ago
“Bitcoin operates on a proof of work concept which is very energy intensive.”
Specifically because work is pretty much synonymous with energy expenditure.
Gold mining, Uranium mining etc., etc, are no different. If something doesn’t take lots of energy, it pretty much isn’t valuable.
Captain Ahab
Captain Ahab
3 years ago
Reply to  StukiMoi
No different, except gold and uranium are real. Also, there are not 21,910 versions of gold. Just ‘one’, that is universal
StukiMoi
StukiMoi
3 years ago
Reply to  Captain Ahab
Gold is not “Real”, as in really all that valuable absent concerns about energy inputs. Nothing is. Throw enough energy at it, and there’s so much gold in the Universe (heck even just in the earth’s core), that the sheer weight of it would make it a less-valuable-than-zero nuisance, rather than a scarce asset, if “mined” available to us earthlings.
How much Gold it is worth bothering to make available, is limited by the energy expenditure required to do so. Just as is the case wrt Bitcoin at any give time.
As a sidenote: Arbitrary categories, classifications, artificial “fundamental differences”, quantizations/discreetizations etc.; are all, always, simply not-really-existsing oversimplifications of reality. There is no “real” vs “not real” wrt economic utility. No strange demarcations handed down to Moses. Gold’s value stems from it’s suitability for certain valuable uses. Ditto Bitcoin’s. In both cases, scarcity, verifiability, divisability/recombinability, comparatively simple and friction free transfer, and low loss storage; forms their main claim to utility. BTC beats Gold at some of those. While Gold bitchslaps BTC all over the place, wrt one important one: It’s historical record, which is something like 15,000 years to 15 years in Gold’s favor.
tractionengine
tractionengine
3 years ago
Reply to  StukiMoi
So, you are saying value is proportional to energy investment? Then methinks you have a lot to learn about human nature. I see no value in Bitcoin etc. but your examples …
FromBrussels2
FromBrussels2
3 years ago
Reply to  StukiMoi
I prefer the tangible stuff !
Sunriver
Sunriver
3 years ago
Pokemon run amok.
Happy New Year.
mcgoverntm
mcgoverntm
3 years ago
Mish,
You have a misspelling in the title of this essay. Very unlike you. I don’t mean to be petty; you’re one of the best and most honest commentators, and it’s important to protect your credibility from detractors.
Cheers and Happy New Year,
Tom
FlyNavy1
FlyNavy1
3 years ago
CNBC transposed “proof-of-work” for “proof-of-stake” in the last sentence of the fourth paragraph. Just the usual sloppy journalism from the “People” magazine of finance.
Mish
Mish
3 years ago
Reply to  FlyNavy1
Yep they did but that is an easy transposition mistake to make. I did not catch it.
vanderlyn
vanderlyn
3 years ago
Reply to  FlyNavy1
idiot box “news” at it’s finest. i don’t think many actually read books anymore. much less financial history books. the irony of rich world is the more degrees bestowed, the less books read. putting them in one’s office library is the typical middlebrow decorating.
PapaDave
PapaDave
3 years ago
So many things that we can invest in. And so many different opinions on what will be rewarding going forward.
Not many investments did well this year. Both stocks and bonds were down. Very unusual. Then there is housing. And crypto. Not good.
Fortunately, thanks to the prophets on this blog, I have been heavily invested in the energy sector that has led the markets in both 2021 (S&P energy sector +53%) and 2022 (+56%).
I don’t think any sector has ever led the market 3 years in a row. So its unlikely that energy will be the top dog again. But for now, energy remains my largest position. But it is time to start nibbling at beaten down sectors, such as renewable energy, and tech. I will be using the generous dividends from the energy companies to start buying these other areas.
Matt3
Matt3
3 years ago
Reply to  PapaDave
The rational for energy was cashflow from activities being higher than investments leaving significant cash to be returned to shareholders (dividends and buy backs). Aren’t the beaten down sectors of renewables and tech the opposite? Growth but no earnings and little or negative cashflow.
Are there other sectors that will have cashflows like energy has had?
Maybe the future is a return to fundamental value derived from a company’s ability to generate cash and reward stockholders.
Thoughts?
PapaDave
PapaDave
3 years ago
Reply to  Matt3
Up until 2 years ago, the energy sector was not returning cash flow to shareholders; it was putting it all into capex, plus borrowing lots for even more capex. This resulted in repeated boom/bust cycles, and very little return for shareholders.
So shareholders left the sector; and those that remained demanded that companies change how they operate. So companies responded by emphasizing cash flow going to pay down their huge debts accumulated from previous capex. Once the debts were reduced to low levels or eliminated, the companies committed to shareholder returns; either through share buybacks, increased dividends, or both.
That is where most energy companies are today. They use a bit of cash flow to maintain or modestly grow their production. And they return the rest to shareholders. I expect 20%/a returns for the rest of the decade.
Renewables are completely different. They are in the early stages of growth. There is no profitability yet and they are going to have to spend a lot on their growth. But because of the Inflation Reduction Act and all the generous incentives for renewables, these companies should have the wind at their back for the next 10 years. All they have to do is execute properly. Some will fail. But some will be 10 baggers or more. I expect capital big gains; no dividends.
Big Tech is becoming mature. But because many still look at them as growth companies, they command high multiples. Which hurt them this year, with many down 30% to 70%. I see them as a good candidate for a comeback. Their big growth days may be over, but after the big drop this year, they could bounce nicely in 2023. I have been nibbling at Tesla, Apple and Netflix so far. Though admittedly, I am mostly day trading them at this point.
Matt3
Matt3
3 years ago
Reply to  PapaDave
Thanks for the reply. I appreciate learning how others see things and invest.
bgwms
bgwms
3 years ago
Reply to  PapaDave
You might want to check the history of the stock market from 1966 – 1982 before you start “nibbling at beaten down sectors such as renewable energy and tech.” That was also a time of increasing inflation at the tail end of a long bull market.
Maximus_Minimus
Maximus_Minimus
3 years ago
Proof of work or proof of stake, all based on Monopoly games where players exchange tokens and believe them to be real.
I wish Darwin was still alive, and explained it in clear extinction of species terms.
But at least the universities are teaching pure, unadulterated science, right?
Zardoz
Zardoz
3 years ago
We’ve been trading tokens for thousands of years. Jesus didn’t approve either.
shamrock
shamrock
3 years ago
I wonder what movie people are watching today.
MBA SOFA
MBA SOFA
3 years ago
It’s better investing in Pokemon cards, Lego boxes or Kiss vynils. And more enjoyable.
Bohm-Bawerk
Bohm-Bawerk
3 years ago
Reply to  MBA SOFA
In 2008 Legos held their value better than anything. Even gold didn’t perform as well. I wanted to pick up some used legos for my kids back then so I was waiting and watching and they never crashed.

Decorate Your Walls with Mish Fine Art Images

Click each image to view details or purchase in the store.

Stay Informed

Subscribe to MishTalk

You will receive all messages from this feed and they will be delivered by email.