Odaily’s editorial tea talk is an informal internal column in which members of the newsroom share immediate reactions to industry news, data, hot events and overlooked details. The format also includes investment ideas and opportunity hypotheses that are still being tested, observations drawn from conversations with industry practitioners, and materials from inside or outside the team that have genuinely improved the editors’ understanding. The column is based on real investment and observation experiences from Odaily editors. It does not accept any form of commercial advertising and does not constitute investment advice. Its purpose is to broaden perspectives and add sources, rather than to create consensus.
BTC dip-buying, HOOD additions and prediction-market trials
One editor introduced the note with the phrase “still inexperienced, still learning,” and said recent trading activity had become somewhat more frequent than before. On the crypto side, the editor bought a small amount during the decline in recent days, mainly BTC, but the entry area was relatively high overall, around 6.2 to 6.6, so there was basically no profit. In U.S. equities, the editor added a small amount of HOOD, with the logic already explained in an article published two days earlier. The same editor has also been playing World Cup-related markets on prediction platforms, combining small, high-frequency copy trades with larger, low-frequency active orders. A new tool is being tested, and the temporary impression is positive, with a recommendation planned after a few more days of trial.
The same editor also discussed the recent strength of HYPE, while arguing that the higher HYPE becomes, the less favorable it is for Hyperliquid. The reasoning centers on HIP-3. Hyperliquid’s earlier and most imaginative narrative was to build a multi-asset trading ecosystem around HIP-3. At present, however, trade.xyz dominates among HIP-3 projects, while Felix and Ventuals have shut down one after another. Since building a custom market on HIP-3 requires staking 500,000 HYPE, an amount worth more than 35 million dollars at current prices, the high price of HYPE has become a barrier to the expansion of the HIP-3 blueprint. The earlier market vision was “Hyperliquid plus countless custom markets”; the current situation looks closer to “Hyperliquid plus trade.xyz.” If the upper-layer market becomes fixed around only trade.xyz, its ability to reach users and its room for narrative imagination are both different from what the market had previously expected.
Looking back at missed trades: calm capital and mindset are scarce
Another editor opened with “just sold SK Hynix too early” and reflected on missed opportunities. In that editor’s view, markets never lack opportunities, but calm capital and a stable mindset are always scarce. Capital markets are continuously liquid, and the market does not end because one opportunity was missed. A short-term surge, a hot sector or a bottoming move missed today is only one small part of countless opportunities. Markets operate day after day, themes rotate, and price cycles repeat. Missing one train does not end the journey. Investing does not require catching every move; it only requires seizing opportunities that fall within one’s own understanding and within controllable risk. Becoming obsessed with opportunities that have already passed, and being dragged along by anxiety, is itself one of the biggest traps in investing.
The editor also described an interesting pattern found when reviewing past trades. From a retrospective standpoint, high-quality opportunities seem to have been everywhere. Looking back at last year, last month, or even just a few weeks earlier, it becomes easy to identify which assets were at low levels, which sectors were about to break out, and which trades deserved heavy allocation. It can seem as if profitable opportunities were scattered everywhere and easy to obtain. Yet this is a form of rear-view-mirror thinking: people often see the market clearly afterward but feel confused in real time. The core lesson drawn by the editor is that history had countless opportunities, and the present also never lacks opportunities. Past opportunities did not disappear; at the time, the problem was insufficient understanding, an unstable mindset, failure to identify them, or lack of confidence to act. By the same logic, the current market still contains opportunities across different levels and risk categories.
SpaceX’s stock-based acquisition of Cursor parent Anysphere
The tea talk also covered the transaction between SpaceX and Anysphere, the parent company of AI programming tool Cursor. On June 16, SpaceX announced a 60 billion dollar acquisition of Anysphere. One editor described the deal as a case of each side getting what it needs: Elon 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 the model of its former partner Anthropic.
Beyond the strategic meaning for both parties, the editor highlighted a detail that can easily be overlooked: the effect on SpaceX’s share price. According to the note, Musk effectively spent no cash, because the entire consideration for the Cursor acquisition is being paid in SpaceX Class A common stock. According to SEC filings cited in the discussion, SpaceX is carrying out 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 Musk gains a larger advantage in this structure. By paying with SpaceX shares, Musk can use the company’s very high current valuation to complete the acquisition while giving up a relatively small amount of equity, lowering the practical cost of the transaction. The editor also noted a timing issue: as of June 16, when both 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. From there, the editor raised an analytical question about SPCX share price: whether the “Musk interest group” would actively stabilize SpaceX trading volume and valuation at a high level in order to complete the acquisition more cheaply and with less equity. The editor also made clear that there is no strong causal relationship between the two; it was presented only as an analytical guess related to SPCX price.
On SPCX’s current pricing, the editor said the price is mainly being pushed up by market sentiment. According to recent Vanda Track data cited in the discussion, SpaceX remains the most favored stock among retail funds and has topped the U.S. single-stock retail net inflow ranking for multiple consecutive days. The editor added that retail enthusiasm will eventually fade, and “belief” is not without a price. At that point, institutions would need to take the baton and become the main force stabilizing the SPCX price.
BTC levels, Japan and Korea equities, HYPE support and ETH disagreement
Another set of comments covered BTC, the SpaceX IPO, Japan and Korea stock markets, and AI-related IPO themes. One editor said BTC had rebounded slightly, while the situation between the United States and Iran had eased. The editor still maintained a bullish view and said a short position would be considered as a test in the 68,000 to 69,000 dollar area. The SpaceX IPO had ended, but on that day’s close it did not hold a 2.2 trillion dollar market capitalization, leading the editor to lose 10 U in anger. The editor nevertheless said that after inclusion in the Nasdaq in July, the price was viewed above 250. Japan and Korea equities were still moving higher, and the strong-get-stronger trend remained clear. The next landmark event identified in the discussion was either a Federal Reserve rate hike or an Anthropic/OpenAI IPO. The editor personally believed Anthropic could challenge SpaceX as another largest IPO in history, with valuation even rising to the 2 trillion to 3 trillion dollar range. The editor also mentioned a post shared by a group member saying that the AI industry, like real estate, is a heavy-asset industry, and said that investing defensively in “shovel sellers” was a reasonable idea.
The final editor reviewed HYPE and ETH. In terms of trading, the editor bought HYPE for a long position when it dropped to around 56 dollars last week, and gradually sold after it reached 70 dollars. The sale was not because of a negative long-term view, but because the editor believed a major short-term breakout would be difficult. Over the long run, the 50 to 60 dollar area is viewed as an important support range, and the editor plans to continue buying around that level. Two reasons were given. First, in the current wave of traditional assets moving on-chain for trading, Hyperliquid has captured the largest benefits. Fees have continued to rise, HYPE buybacks have surged, and the average monthly buyback over the past six months has exceeded 60 million dollars. The editor emphasized that 97% to 99% of Hyperliquid platform trading-fee revenue is used directly to repurchase HYPE in the open market, and said no exchange currently appears to be doing the same thing, making it the biggest growth flywheel. Second, after the HYPE spot ETF listing, cumulative net inflows reached 180 million dollars, with average daily net inflows of 7.5 million dollars. In the editor’s view, traditional capital’s preference for HYPE is clear, and this treatment has not been seen after the listing of other crypto ETFs. On ETH, the editor said the market is in a strange state. Pure crypto investors are extremely disappointed with ETH because its price performance over recent years has been weak and opportunity costs have been lost. Traditional investors, especially Wall Street figures represented by Tom Lee, are instead continuing to add real capital to ETH and regard it as an undervalued “Amazon.” Neither side can convince the other, so the question is left to time. The editor’s personal view is that ETH has now fallen to a “cabbage price,” and the cost of entering now is lower than Bitmine’s.