Odaily’s editorial tea chat is an internal, informal column designed to capture how members of the newsroom think about market news, data, hot events and the smaller details around them. The column records real investment experiences and observations from the editorial team. It does not accept commercial advertising and does not constitute investment advice. Its stated purpose is to broaden perspectives and add information sources, rather than to create consensus. The June 17 discussion covered recent personal trading activity, HYPE and the Hyperliquid ecosystem, the psychology of missing trades, SpaceX’s acquisition of Anysphere, SPCX price behavior, and views on BTC and ETH.
Small BTC dip buying, HOOD exposure and prediction market tests
One editor, introducing himself with the phrase “still learning,” said his recent trading frequency had become slightly higher than before. In crypto, he bought a small amount during the recent decline, mainly BTC. However, the entry levels were generally high, around the 6.2 to 6.6 range, so there was almost no profit. In U.S. equities, he added a small position in HOOD, with the reasoning already explained in an article published a few days earlier. He also said he was playing World Cup-related markets on prediction platforms, while combining small, high-frequency copy trades with larger, lower-frequency discretionary orders. He is testing a new tool and described the current experience as “not bad,” adding that he would try it for a few more days before recommending it.
The same editor also discussed HYPE’s recent strong performance, but argued that “the more expensive HYPE becomes, the less favorable it is for Hyperliquid.” His concern is centered on the changing narrative around HIP-3. Previously, the most imaginative story around Hyperliquid was the possibility of building a multi-asset trading ecosystem through HIP-3. At present, however, trade.xyz appears to dominate HIP-3 projects, while Felix and Ventuals have shut down one after another. Since building a customized market on HIP-3 requires staking 500,000 HYPE, which is worth more than $35 million at current prices, the elevated price of HYPE has effectively become an obstacle to expanding the HIP-3 blueprint. Earlier market expectations were closer to “Hyperliquid plus countless custom markets.” The current picture looks more like “Hyperliquid plus trade.xyz.” If the upper-layer market becomes fixed around a single player, trade.xyz, that would not fully match earlier expectations in terms of user reach or the room for imagination around the ecosystem.
Reflections after selling SK Hynix too early
Another editor opened by saying he had “just sold SK Hynix too early,” and focused his comments on trading mentality. In his view, markets never lack opportunities; what remains scarce is calm capital and a stable mindset. Capital markets are continuously liquid, and a market does not end simply because one opportunity was missed. A short-term surge in a single asset, a hot sector, or a bottoming move is only one small part of countless market opportunities. Investors do not need to catch every move. They only need to seize opportunities that fall within their own knowledge boundaries and carry controllable risk. Becoming fixated on an opportunity that has already passed and being pulled along by anxiety is itself one of the biggest traps in investing.
After reviewing past trading history, he noticed an interesting pattern: from a retrospective perspective, high-quality opportunities seem to have been everywhere. Looking back at last year, last month, or even the past few weeks, it is easy to identify which assets were at low levels, which sectors were about to break out, and which trends appeared suitable for heavy positioning. In hindsight, profitable opportunities seem to have been available everywhere. But this is a form of “rear-view mirror thinking”: the market looks clear after the fact, while the present remains confusing. For him, the phenomenon points to one core truth: history contained countless opportunities, and the present also never lacks them. Past opportunities did not disappear; at the time, the limitation was insufficient understanding, an unstable mindset, and an inability or reluctance to act. By the same logic, the current market still contains investment opportunities across different levels and different risk profiles.
SpaceX’s Anysphere acquisition and the SPCX price question
The tea chat also covered SpaceX’s June 16 announcement that it would acquire Anysphere, the parent company of AI coding tool Cursor, for $60 billion. One editor characterized the deal as an exchange of what each side needs. Elon Musk needs Cursor’s developer data to train his AI model Grok, while Anysphere needs the large computing resources behind SpaceX to train its own AI model, Composer, and compete against models from its former partner Anthropic. Beyond the strategic meaning for both sides, the discussion focused on a detail that can be overlooked: the effect on SpaceX’s stock price. The reason is that the acquisition is being paid entirely in SpaceX Class A common stock, meaning Musk is not paying cash.
According to SEC filings cited in the discussion, SpaceX will implement the merger with Anysphere through its wholly owned subsidiary X67 Inc. X67 Inc. will merge into Anysphere, and Cursor will remain as the surviving entity and become a wholly owned subsidiary of SpaceX. Upon completion of the merger, 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 editor argued that paying with SpaceX stock allows Musk to use the company’s currently elevated valuation to complete the acquisition while giving up a relatively small amount of equity, making the actual cost much lower than a cash transaction.
Since the merger agreement was signed on June 16, only three trading days after SpaceX’s listing, the earliest equity closing would occur next week. The editor then raised a question: in order to complete the deal with less equity, would related interest groups actively stabilize SpaceX’s trading volume and market value at high levels? The piece also stressed that there is no strong causal relationship between the two, and that this was only an analytical conjecture about factors affecting SPCX’s stock price. At present, the price of SPCX is mainly driven by market sentiment. According to recent Vanda Track data, SpaceX remains the stock most favored by retail money and has ranked first for several consecutive days on the U.S. retail net inflow list. However, retail enthusiasm can fade, and when that happens, institutions would need to take over as the main force stabilizing SPCX’s price.
BTC positioning, Japan and Korea equities, HYPE support and the ETH divide
Another set of comments focused on macro conditions and asset prices. One editor said BTC had rebounded slightly, while tensions between the United States and Iran had eased. He remained bullish for now and would consider testing a short position in the 68,000 to 69,000 range. On SpaceX, he said the IPO had ended, but the stock failed to hold a $2.2 trillion market value by the close that day, leading him to “angrily lose 10 U.” He added that after the company enters the Nasdaq in July, he sees it above 250. Japanese and Korean stock markets are still pushing higher, and the trend of strong assets remaining strong is still clear. He identified the next landmark event as either a Federal Reserve rate hike or an Anthropic/OpenAI IPO, and stated that Anthropic has a chance to challenge SpaceX as another historically large IPO, with its valuation rising to the $2 trillion to $3 trillion range. He also referred to a post shared by a group member saying that “the AI industry is a heavy-asset industry like real estate,” and said that positioning around “selling shovels” is a reasonable defensive investment idea.
The final editor reviewed recent HYPE trading. Last week, when HYPE fell to around $56, he added a long position and then gradually sold after it reached $70. He emphasized that selling did not mean he had become negative on the asset. Rather, he believed it would be difficult to achieve a major short-term breakout. From a longer-term perspective, he sees the $50 to $60 range as an important support area and plans to continue buying there. He gave two reasons. First, in the wave of traditional assets moving on-chain for trading, Hyperliquid has captured a major share of the benefits. Fees have continued to rise, HYPE buybacks have increased sharply, and average monthly buybacks over the past six months have exceeded $60 million. He also noted that 97% to 99% of Hyperliquid platform trading fee revenue is used directly to repurchase HYPE in the open market, describing this as its largest growth flywheel. Second, after the HYPE spot ETF listing, cumulative net inflows reached $180 million, with average daily net inflows of $7.5 million, showing the preference of traditional capital for HYPE.
On ETH, the same editor described a strange split in the market. Crypto-native investors are deeply disappointed with ETH because its price performance over the past several years has been weak, creating a major opportunity cost. Traditional investors, especially Wall Street figures represented by Tom Lee, have continued to increase ETH exposure with real capital and view it as an undervalued “Amazon.” Neither side can convince the other, so the answer will be left to time. The editor’s personal view is that ETH has fallen to a “cabbage price,” and that the current cost of entering is lower than Bitmine’s.