Odaily’s editorial roundtable is presented as an informal internal column. It gathers the editorial team’s immediate views on industry news, data, hot events, and smaller details around them, while also recording investment ideas and opportunity hypotheses that are still being tested. These notes are not described as direct money-making formulas; in some cases, they are simply questions that the editors are still working through. The column also includes observations from conversations with industry practitioners and materials that have genuinely helped the team update its understanding, whether those materials came from inside or outside the newsroom.
The column states that its content is based on real investment experience and observations from Odaily editorial members. It does not accept any form of commercial advertising and does not constitute investment advice. Its stated purpose is to broaden perspectives and supplement information sources rather than to manufacture consensus. Readers are invited to join the Odaily community, including the Telegram discussion group and the official X account, for exchange, questioning, and casual discussion.
Recent trades: BTC dip-buying, HOOD, and prediction markets
One editor introduced their current state with the phrase “still learning.” They said their recent trading activity has become slightly more frequent than before. On the crypto side, they bought a small amount during the recent decline, mainly BTC. However, the overall entry range was relatively high, around 6.2 to 6.6, so there was basically no profit. In U.S. equities, they added a small position in HOOD, noting that the logic had already been discussed in an article published two days earlier. They also said they had been playing World Cup-related trades in prediction markets, combining small, high-frequency copy trading while testing a new tool that currently feels good, with larger and lower-frequency active orders.
The same editor discussed HYPE and Hyperliquid. Although HYPE has performed well recently, the editor increasingly feels that “the more expensive HYPE becomes, the more unfavorable it is for Hyperliquid.” The reason given is that Hyperliquid’s most imaginative previous narrative was built around HIP-3 and the creation of a multi-asset trading ecosystem. At present, however, trade.xyz dominates among HIP-3 projects, while Felix and Ventuals have shut down one after another. The editor argued that an excessively high HYPE price has become an obstacle to the expansion of the HIP-3 blueprint, because building a custom market on HIP-3 requires staking 500,000 HYPE, which is worth more than $35 million at current prices. The earlier market imagination was “Hyperliquid plus countless custom markets,” but the current situation looks more like “Hyperliquid plus trade.xyz.” If the upper-layer market becomes fixed around trade.xyz alone, that would fall short of previous expectations in both user reach and the scope of future imagination.
Missed SK Hynix trade and the discipline of staying calm
Another editor introduced their note by saying they had just sold SK Hynix too early. The lesson they drew was that markets never lack opportunities, but calm capital and a calm mindset are always scarce. Capital markets are continuously flowing, and a market does not end simply because one opportunity was missed. A short-term explosive target, a hot sector, or a bottoming move that was not captured is only one small part of the many opportunities in the market. Themes rotate, cycles of rise and fall repeat, and investors do not need to catch every move. According to this view, the key is to seize opportunities that are within one’s own circle of understanding and whose risks can be controlled. Obsessing over an opportunity that has already passed and being dragged around by anxiety is itself one of the major traps in investing.
The editor also described an observation from reviewing past trading history. When looking back after the fact, it often seems easy to find excellent opportunities everywhere. Looking at last year, last month, or even the market from several weeks ago, investors can clearly identify which assets were at low levels, which sectors were about to break out, and which trades were worth a heavy position, as if profitable opportunities had been available everywhere. But that is exactly the problem of “rear-view mirror thinking”: people can see the market clearly after the fact while remaining confused in the present. The editor argued that past opportunities did not disappear; at that time, investors simply lacked enough understanding, had an unstable mindset, failed to identify them, or did not dare to act. In the same way, the current market still contains opportunities of different levels and different risk profiles.
SpaceX, Anysphere, and the SPCX price question
The roundtable also discussed SpaceX’s June 16 announcement that it would acquire Anysphere, the parent company of the AI programming tool Cursor, for $60 billion. One contributor described the deal as a case of each side getting what it needs. Musk needs Cursor’s developer data to train his AI model Grok, while Anysphere needs the large computing power behind SpaceX to train its own AI model Composer and compete with models from its former partner Anthropic. Beyond the strategic meaning for the two sides, the contributor focused on a detail that is easily overlooked: the effect of the deal on SpaceX’s share price, because Musk did not pay cash and the entire acquisition consideration for Cursor was paid in SpaceX Class A common stock.
According to the SEC filing cited in the roundtable, SpaceX will carry out the merger with Anysphere through its wholly owned subsidiary X67 Inc. X67 Inc. will merge into Anysphere, and Cursor, as the surviving entity, will become a wholly owned subsidiary of SpaceX. When the merger is completed, all common and preferred shares of Anysphere will be converted into SpaceX Class A common stock. The exchange ratio will be calculated based on the volume-weighted average price over the seven consecutive trading days before closing. The contributor’s view was that Musk gained a greater advantage from the structure, because using SpaceX shares allows him to use the company’s currently very high valuation and complete the acquisition by giving up a relatively small amount of equity. In that sense, the actual cost is much lower, and much of what is being paid is described as valuation premium.
The contributor then raised the key timing issue. As of June 16, when the two sides signed the merger agreement, only three trading days had passed since SpaceX’s listing, so the earliest equity delivery would occur the following week. To complete the acquisition at a lower cost and with fewer shares, the contributor asked whether the “Musk interest group” would actively stabilize SpaceX’s trading volume and market value at a high level. They also stated clearly that there is no strong causal relationship between the two points, and that this was only a speculative analysis factor for SPCX’s share price. The current SPCX price is mainly being pushed up by market sentiment. According to recent Vanda Track data cited in the note, SpaceX remains the most favored stock among retail funds and has ranked first in net retail inflows among U.S. individual stocks for multiple consecutive days. However, the contributor said retail enthusiasm will eventually cool, and when that happens, institutions would need to take over as the main force stabilizing the SPCX price.
BTC, Asian equities, AI IPOs, HYPE positioning, and ETH
Another set of notes focused on BTC, the SpaceX IPO, Japanese and South Korean equities, and AI IPOs. The contributor said BTC had rebounded slightly and that the situation between the United States and Iran had eased. They remained bullish for now, but said they would consider testing a short position around the 68,000 to 69,000 range. On SpaceX, they noted that the IPO had ended, but the closing price on the day did not hold a $2.2 trillion market value, causing them to lose 10 U. Even so, they still looked to above 250 after inclusion in the Nasdaq in July. They also said Japanese and South Korean stock markets were continuing to rise and that the trend of strong assets getting stronger remained clear. The next landmark event, in their view, would be either a Federal Reserve rate hike or the Anthropic/OpenAI IPO. The contributor personally believed Anthropic could challenge for another largest IPO in history after SpaceX, with market value even rising into the $2 trillion to $3 trillion range. They also mentioned a post shared by a group member arguing that “the AI industry, like real estate, is a heavy-asset industry,” and said that this made sense; therefore, positioning in “selling shovels” as a defensive investment approach was viewed as a good idea.
The final contributor described their HYPE trade. Last week, when HYPE fell to around $56, they added a long position and then gradually sold after the price moved above $70. The sale did not mean they were no longer optimistic. Rather, they believed it would be difficult for HYPE to make a major short-term breakthrough. From a longer-term perspective, however, they viewed the $50 to $60 range as an important support zone and planned to continue buying there later. They gave two reasons. First, in the current wave of traditional assets moving on-chain for trading, Hyperliquid has effectively captured the largest benefit. Fees have continued to surge, and HYPE buyback volume has increased sharply, with average monthly buybacks over the past six months exceeding $60 million. The contributor noted that 97% to 99% of Hyperliquid platform trading fee revenue is directly used to buy back HYPE on the open market, adding that no other exchange currently appears to do this, and calling it the biggest growth flywheel. Second, after the HYPE spot ETF launched, cumulative net inflows reached $180 million, with average daily net inflows of $7.5 million. In the contributor’s view, the preference from traditional capital toward HYPE is clear, and this is a treatment not seen after the launch of other crypto ETFs.
On ETH, the same contributor said the current market has entered a strange state. Pure crypto investors are deeply disappointed with ETH because its price performance over the past few years has been very weak, creating a loss of opportunity cost. Traditional investors, especially Wall Street figures represented by Tom Lee, are instead continuing to add real money to ETH, treating it as an undervalued “Amazon.” The two sides cannot convince each other, so the answer will be left to time. The contributor personally believes ETH has now fallen to a “cabbage price,” and that buying now gives an entry cost even lower than Bitmine’s.