Niesha Hardge dGSp
BTC Holder
High-Frequency Trader
7.1 Months
623 Following
711 Followers
691 Liked
14 Shared
Posts
All
Quotes
Videos
PINNED
I revisited the official documentation of Sign today, and one sentence changed my understanding of this project.
There is a sentence in the documentation that I hadn't paid much attention to before:
"S.I.G.N. is not a product container. It is a system-level blueprint."
Not a product container, but a system-level blueprint.
I previously understood Sign as a company that produced three products—Sign Protocol, TokenTable, EthSign. Three tools, use whichever one is needed. This interpretation is not wrong, but it's too superficial.
The logic of the documentation is another matter: S.I.G.N. describes a national-level system architecture, with three layers: currency, identity, and capital. Sign Protocol is the evidence layer within this architecture, TokenTable is the capital distribution component, and EthSign is the protocol execution tool. They are not parallel products; they are components that each take on different responsibilities within the same system.
What’s the difference?
A company selling three tools allows customers to leave after using one; a company providing a system-level blueprint means that once a customer is deployed, the cost of replacing it is catastrophic. If Sign is truly integrated into a country's digital currency and identity system, for that country to replace it means simultaneously rebuilding the currency layer, identity layer, and capital distribution layer—this is not just changing a SaaS subscription; it's rebuilding infrastructure.
This moat is much deeper than "200 projects are using TokenTable."
I am not sure how deeply the government clients that have already deployed are embedded in this architecture. But if they are embedded, Sign's competitive barrier is not technology, but the cost of migration.
@SignOfficial $SIGN
#Sign地缘政治基建
There is a sentence in the documentation that I hadn't paid much attention to before:
"S.I.G.N. is not a product container. It is a system-level blueprint."
Not a product container, but a system-level blueprint.
I previously understood Sign as a company that produced three products—Sign Protocol, TokenTable, EthSign. Three tools, use whichever one is needed. This interpretation is not wrong, but it's too superficial.
The logic of the documentation is another matter: S.I.G.N. describes a national-level system architecture, with three layers: currency, identity, and capital. Sign Protocol is the evidence layer within this architecture, TokenTable is the capital distribution component, and EthSign is the protocol execution tool. They are not parallel products; they are components that each take on different responsibilities within the same system.
What’s the difference?
A company selling three tools allows customers to leave after using one; a company providing a system-level blueprint means that once a customer is deployed, the cost of replacing it is catastrophic. If Sign is truly integrated into a country's digital currency and identity system, for that country to replace it means simultaneously rebuilding the currency layer, identity layer, and capital distribution layer—this is not just changing a SaaS subscription; it's rebuilding infrastructure.
This moat is much deeper than "200 projects are using TokenTable."
I am not sure how deeply the government clients that have already deployed are embedded in this architecture. But if they are embedded, Sign's competitive barrier is not technology, but the cost of migration.
@SignOfficial $SIGN
#Sign地缘政治基建
$NOM
From a low of $0.001732 all the way up to $0.005280, an increase of approximately 205%, now fluctuating near the high point.
RSI 76.35 — Seriously overbought range
MACD golden cross upwards, histogram expanding, short-term momentum still present
Trading volume surged, MA5 has crossed above MA10, volume-price coordination
24h trading volume 52.2 billion NOM / 214 million USDT, clearly increased
Current situation:
In 3 hours increased by over 200%, RSI 76 is seriously overbought. This type of movement historically almost always leads to a rapid correction, it's just a matter of time.
Operational suggestions:
Long: do not chase the current price
Wait for a correction to 0.0035～0.0040 before considering entry,
Stop loss at $0.0028,
Target to exit near $0.0052.
Short (main direction)
Entry: Current price around 0.0050～0.0053 can take a small short position
Stop loss: $0.0058 if it closes above, exit
Target: First target $0.0038, take half off; remaining look at $0.0030
RSI 76+ threefold increase, now entering long is catching at the very top. Light short or just observe, wait for a drop before reassessing long opportunities.
From a low of $0.001732 all the way up to $0.005280, an increase of approximately 205%, now fluctuating near the high point.
RSI 76.35 — Seriously overbought range
MACD golden cross upwards, histogram expanding, short-term momentum still present
Trading volume surged, MA5 has crossed above MA10, volume-price coordination
24h trading volume 52.2 billion NOM / 214 million USDT, clearly increased
Current situation:
In 3 hours increased by over 200%, RSI 76 is seriously overbought. This type of movement historically almost always leads to a rapid correction, it's just a matter of time.
Operational suggestions:
Long: do not chase the current price
Wait for a correction to 0.0035～0.0040 before considering entry,
Stop loss at $0.0028,
Target to exit near $0.0052.
Short (main direction)
Entry: Current price around 0.0050～0.0053 can take a small short position
Stop loss: $0.0058 if it closes above, exit
Target: First target $0.0038, take half off; remaining look at $0.0030
RSI 76+ threefold increase, now entering long is catching at the very top. Light short or just observe, wait for a drop before reassessing long opportunities.
After obtaining Kyrgyzstan with $SIGN , I finally understood the true growth logic of government contracts business.
When Kyrgyzstan signed, the president and CZ were present, and the sense of ceremony was full.
At that time, I felt this was a milestone, Sign had secured a country.
Later, I thought about it and realized that this understanding was shallow.
Securing a country is not the end, but a model.
Government procurement has a characteristic: sovereign countries do not like to be the first to take risks but are very willing to follow their neighbors. Kyrgyzstan signed, and policymakers in Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan in Central Asia are watching. Their question is not "Is this technology good?" but "Has it been validated by similar countries?".
Every time Sign secures a country, the sales difficulty for the next country decreases by one level.
It’s not linear growth; it’s compound logic.
This also explains why CZ's value here is not just a one-time referral. His connections in the government circles essentially help Sign reduce the psychological barrier of being the 'first to take risks' in multiple countries simultaneously—showing potential customers that this is not an unendorsed experiment, but a direction backed by credible figures.
The growth of Sign's government contracts will not be uniform. It may be quiet for a long time and then announce three countries in one month.
This rhythm is completely different from the quarterly growth of SaaS. Those who are waiting need to understand the characteristics of this growth method.
@SignOfficial $SIGN
#Sign地缘政治基建
When Kyrgyzstan signed, the president and CZ were present, and the sense of ceremony was full.
At that time, I felt this was a milestone, Sign had secured a country.
Later, I thought about it and realized that this understanding was shallow.
Securing a country is not the end, but a model.
Government procurement has a characteristic: sovereign countries do not like to be the first to take risks but are very willing to follow their neighbors. Kyrgyzstan signed, and policymakers in Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan in Central Asia are watching. Their question is not "Is this technology good?" but "Has it been validated by similar countries?".
Every time Sign secures a country, the sales difficulty for the next country decreases by one level.
It’s not linear growth; it’s compound logic.
This also explains why CZ's value here is not just a one-time referral. His connections in the government circles essentially help Sign reduce the psychological barrier of being the 'first to take risks' in multiple countries simultaneously—showing potential customers that this is not an unendorsed experiment, but a direction backed by credible figures.
The growth of Sign's government contracts will not be uniform. It may be quiet for a long time and then announce three countries in one month.
This rhythm is completely different from the quarterly growth of SaaS. Those who are waiting need to understand the characteristics of this growth method.
@SignOfficial $SIGN
#Sign地缘政治基建
Hearing the group compare Polkadot to Sign, I finally saw through how these geeks are trying to grab the 'national-level outsourcing' bottom line.
Just when the massive unlock yesterday finally calmed down, today a guy in the group asked me, 'What exactly is the difference between Sign and the cross-chain kings like Polkadot and Cosmos? Aren't they all about inter-chain communication?' I stared at the screen and smoked half a cigarette, unable to explain clearly in just a few sentences. Because as soon as you put them in the same box for comparison, your brain gets washed out by the assembly line white papers.
You pull down the underpants of these three families to see who makes money from whom. Polkadot is working on parallel chains, Cosmos is working on IBC communication, and the work of the 'foreman' is simply building scaffolding for Web3 programmers. But what about Sign? These people haven't even given a proper glance at the developers in the community. What they hold, the Sovereign L2 Stack and TokenTable, are directly plugged into the Ministry of Finance and the central bank building. They are helping the country create a digital printing machine and issue digital household registration books. It's like trying to score McKinsey and Amazon AWS together. Everyone makes money from the B-end, but they are not competing for the same bowl of rice.
You pull down the underpants of these three families to see who makes money from whom. Polkadot is working on parallel chains, Cosmos is working on IBC communication, and the work of the 'foreman' is simply building scaffolding for Web3 programmers. But what about Sign? These people haven't even given a proper glance at the developers in the community. What they hold, the Sovereign L2 Stack and TokenTable, are directly plugged into the Ministry of Finance and the central bank building. They are helping the country create a digital printing machine and issue digital household registration books. It's like trying to score McKinsey and Amazon AWS together. Everyone makes money from the B-end, but they are not competing for the same bowl of rice.
【diao毛们，来吧】
$AIOT
Binance contract current price: $0.01097
Spot approximately $0.01194, 24-hour increase 6.6%, market cap $3.38 million
Current issues:
Market cap $3.38 million, contract price $0.01097 vs spot $0.01194, contract discount approximately 8%, similar to the ZEC situation—contract bulls are not active. 24-hour trading volume is only $1.01 million, liquidity is extremely poor.
Operational framework
Long (very light position)
Entry: 0.0095～0.0105
Stop loss: $0.0080
Target: $0.0140 half; $0.0170 remaining
Short
Entry: 0.0125～0.0140 rebound short
Stop loss: $0.0155
Target: $0.0090
In one sentence:
A contract with a market cap of $3 million can be pushed up by a single large order. Direction judgment is not important, position control is key—1% of total position is enough, do not over-leverage.
$AIOT
$AIOT
Binance contract current price: $0.01097
Spot approximately $0.01194, 24-hour increase 6.6%, market cap $3.38 million
Current issues:
Market cap $3.38 million, contract price $0.01097 vs spot $0.01194, contract discount approximately 8%, similar to the ZEC situation—contract bulls are not active. 24-hour trading volume is only $1.01 million, liquidity is extremely poor.
Operational framework
Long (very light position)
Entry: 0.0095～0.0105
Stop loss: $0.0080
Target: $0.0140 half; $0.0170 remaining
Short
Entry: 0.0125～0.0140 rebound short
Stop loss: $0.0155
Target: $0.0090
In one sentence:
A contract with a market cap of $3 million can be pushed up by a single large order. Direction judgment is not important, position control is key—1% of total position is enough, do not over-leverage.
$AIOT
$RIVER
【The opportunity for the rats to move has come】RIVERUSDT perpetual contract
Current price: $17.298
24h increase: +24.49%
24h low: $12.152, high: $17.648
Trading volume: 357 million USDT, quite large
Chart interpretation (4 hours):
From the high point of $33, it dropped all the way to $12, then rebounded to the current $17.
RSI 59.17 — Neutral to bullish, still some room
MACD DIF -0.494 / DEA -1.147, histogram turning green with golden cross formation, momentum is shifting bullish
Trading volume has significantly increased, the rebound is supported by volume, relatively healthy
However, overall still in the rebound phase of a major drop trend, with considerable pressure above
Operation suggestion:
Go long (follow the rebound)
Entry: 15.5～16.5 on pullback
Stop loss: $13.5 if it closes below
Target: $20 to take half; 23～24 for the remaining
Go short (wait for the rebound high)
Entry: 20～22 on the rise
Stop loss: $24.5
Target: $15
$RIVER
In one sentence:
From $12 up 24%, chasing long now is no longer at a low point. Wait for a pullback to 15～16.5 to enter long for more stability, or wait until it reaches $20+ to short. Top warning "ETH, XRP, and River face liquidation risks", be aware of significant liquidation pressure above.
【The opportunity for the rats to move has come】RIVERUSDT perpetual contract
Current price: $17.298
24h increase: +24.49%
24h low: $12.152, high: $17.648
Trading volume: 357 million USDT, quite large
Chart interpretation (4 hours):
From the high point of $33, it dropped all the way to $12, then rebounded to the current $17.
RSI 59.17 — Neutral to bullish, still some room
MACD DIF -0.494 / DEA -1.147, histogram turning green with golden cross formation, momentum is shifting bullish
Trading volume has significantly increased, the rebound is supported by volume, relatively healthy
However, overall still in the rebound phase of a major drop trend, with considerable pressure above
Operation suggestion:
Go long (follow the rebound)
Entry: 15.5～16.5 on pullback
Stop loss: $13.5 if it closes below
Target: $20 to take half; 23～24 for the remaining
Go short (wait for the rebound high)
Entry: 20～22 on the rise
Stop loss: $24.5
Target: $15
$RIVER
In one sentence:
From $12 up 24%, chasing long now is no longer at a low point. Wait for a pullback to 15～16.5 to enter long for more stability, or wait until it reaches $20+ to short. Top warning "ETH, XRP, and River face liquidation risks", be aware of significant liquidation pressure above.
SIGN has been online for almost a year, and I've taken a moment to reflect on what has happened over the past year.
On April 28 last year, SIGN was launched on Binance, with an opening price of around $0.05.
Today, the price is just over $0.03, nearly 40% lower than the opening price.
If we only look at this number, those who held SIGN this year have lost money.
But I paused to think about what actually happened with Sign this year—two rounds of financing totaling over $40 million, the Sierra Leone national identity system is genuinely operational, the Central Bank of Kyrgyzstan signed a contract, the white paper was published, TokenTable had an annual revenue of $15 million, repurchased 176 million tokens, and the Orange Dynasty community has over 4 million members.
None of these things had happened when I bought in.
Now they have happened, but the price is even lower than it was then.
I don't know how to define this year. If I say it's a loss, the fundamentals are indeed better than when I bought in; if I say it's a gain, the figures show a loss.
The only thing I can say is: if I had known a year ago that all these things would happen, I would most likely still have bought.
The difference is my expectations about time. I thought government contracts would be finalized more quickly, and the narrative would be priced in faster. The result is that they are indeed happening, just much slower than I expected.
In the second year, I plan to continue waiting.
$SIGN
@SignOfficial l #Sign地缘政治基建
On April 28 last year, SIGN was launched on Binance, with an opening price of around $0.05.
Today, the price is just over $0.03, nearly 40% lower than the opening price.
If we only look at this number, those who held SIGN this year have lost money.
But I paused to think about what actually happened with Sign this year—two rounds of financing totaling over $40 million, the Sierra Leone national identity system is genuinely operational, the Central Bank of Kyrgyzstan signed a contract, the white paper was published, TokenTable had an annual revenue of $15 million, repurchased 176 million tokens, and the Orange Dynasty community has over 4 million members.
None of these things had happened when I bought in.
Now they have happened, but the price is even lower than it was then.
I don't know how to define this year. If I say it's a loss, the fundamentals are indeed better than when I bought in; if I say it's a gain, the figures show a loss.
The only thing I can say is: if I had known a year ago that all these things would happen, I would most likely still have bought.
The difference is my expectations about time. I thought government contracts would be finalized more quickly, and the narrative would be priced in faster. The result is that they are indeed happening, just much slower than I expected.
In the second year, I plan to continue waiting.
$SIGN
@SignOfficial l #Sign地缘政治基建
In the Tuesday unlocking stampede, I firmly held my bottom position, and I finally dared to face the bloody truth of 'why sovereign orders are difficult to produce.'
In this wave of Tuesday's massive unlocking and stampede, I held tightly to my bottom position without selling a single share. After weathering the market shock, I lit a cigarette and forced myself to calculate a bloody account that I had been avoiding for a year: from the issuance of tokens to now, it has been a whole year. Why has the narrative of the sovereign infrastructure that was praised so highly been so slow to land that it makes people want to curse? Don’t use phrases like 'government procurement is inherently slow' to numb yourself. Those who have truly rolled in the muddy waters of government and enterprise know that there are three extremely brutal structural deadlocks behind it.
First, the strangulation of interests that smash people's rice bowls. $SIGN What is being sold is not software; it is forcibly pulling out the existing IT foundation of the government. How many local outsourcing companies that eat kickbacks have been supported by the original broken system? How many bureaucrats' power rent-seeking spaces have been covered up? If you bring a transparent blockchain in, this is not a technical negotiation; it's digging up someone's ancestral grave. The vested interests will definitely try their best to trip you up.
First, the strangulation of interests that smash people's rice bowls. $SIGN What is being sold is not software; it is forcibly pulling out the existing IT foundation of the government. How many local outsourcing companies that eat kickbacks have been supported by the original broken system? How many bureaucrats' power rent-seeking spaces have been covered up? If you bring a transparent blockchain in, this is not a technical negotiation; it's digging up someone's ancestral grave. The vested interests will definitely try their best to trip you up.
【GM diao 毛们，来盘它！】$ZEC ZECUSDT perpetual contract
Current price: $227.55
Funding rate: +0.00154% (positive rate, long pays, neutral bias)
Long-short ratio: 44.98% long vs 55.02% short, slight advantage for shorts
Operation suggestion (based on contract market):
Long-short ratio 55:45 slightly bearish, funding rate close to zero, no obvious directional bias. Combined with the 4-hour MACD golden cross, RSI 57 data:
Go long
Entry: 220～224 on pullback
Stop loss: $205 if it closes below
Target: $242 to take half; $260 remaining
Go short
Entry: 238～245 on a spike
Stop loss: $252
Target: $215
$ZEC
Current price: $227.55
Funding rate: +0.00154% (positive rate, long pays, neutral bias)
Long-short ratio: 44.98% long vs 55.02% short, slight advantage for shorts
Operation suggestion (based on contract market):
Long-short ratio 55:45 slightly bearish, funding rate close to zero, no obvious directional bias. Combined with the 4-hour MACD golden cross, RSI 57 data:
Go long
Entry: 220～224 on pullback
Stop loss: $205 if it closes below
Target: $242 to take half; $260 remaining
Go short
Entry: 238～245 on a spike
Stop loss: $252
Target: $215
$ZEC
$ZEC Spot Price: $227.10
Dropped from a high of $557 all the way down
Lowest hit $185, now rebounding to $227
RSI 48.76, neutral to weak
MACD DIF -5.05 / DEA -4.88, still below the zero axis, bears have not fully exited
Daily trading volume shrinks, rebound momentum is average
Operating Suggestions (based on spot chart)
Go long (corresponding to the contract)
Entry: 215～225 pullback
Stop loss: $195 if closes below
Target: $260 take half, remaining watch $285
Go short
Entry: 250～270 rebound short
Stop loss: $285
Target: $210 reduce position
Current position $227 is in the consolidation area after the rebound from the low point of $185, both directions have space, wait for confirmation before taking action is more stable.
$ZEC
Dropped from a high of $557 all the way down
Lowest hit $185, now rebounding to $227
RSI 48.76, neutral to weak
MACD DIF -5.05 / DEA -4.88, still below the zero axis, bears have not fully exited
Daily trading volume shrinks, rebound momentum is average
Operating Suggestions (based on spot chart)
Go long (corresponding to the contract)
Entry: 215～225 pullback
Stop loss: $195 if closes below
Target: $260 take half, remaining watch $285
Go short
Entry: 250～270 rebound short
Stop loss: $285
Target: $210 reduce position
Current position $227 is in the consolidation area after the rebound from the low point of $185, both directions have space, wait for confirmation before taking action is more stable.
$ZEC
Does anyone know? It feels fake.
How can it be linked to the graduation certificate?
Did I go to Old Black's place to get credits?
How can it be linked to the graduation certificate?
Did I go to Old Black's place to get credits?
$NOM
The direction is bearish, the logic remains unchanged:
OrangeX delisted NOM spot on March 19, and Upbit had also previously delisted it, with exchanges continuously shrinking liquidity. CoinMarketCap has fallen about 46% in the past 30 days, and there are no reversal signals in the trend.
Short
Entry: $0.0036～$0.0040 for short on rebound
Stop-loss: $0.0048 close out if broken
Target: $0.0025 take profit; remaining look at $0.0018
Long (buying on an oversold rebound, very light position)
Entry: $0.0025～$0.0028 only consider buying
Stop-loss: $0.0020
Target: $0.0038 exit
In summary:
Market cap is less than 10 million, exchanges are continuously decreasing, and the new white paper is a distant prospect. Entering a long position now is like catching a falling knife, the bearish direction remains unchanged.
$NOM
The direction is bearish, the logic remains unchanged:
OrangeX delisted NOM spot on March 19, and Upbit had also previously delisted it, with exchanges continuously shrinking liquidity. CoinMarketCap has fallen about 46% in the past 30 days, and there are no reversal signals in the trend.
Short
Entry: $0.0036～$0.0040 for short on rebound
Stop-loss: $0.0048 close out if broken
Target: $0.0025 take profit; remaining look at $0.0018
Long (buying on an oversold rebound, very light position)
Entry: $0.0025～$0.0028 only consider buying
Stop-loss: $0.0020
Target: $0.0038 exit
In summary:
Market cap is less than 10 million, exchanges are continuously decreasing, and the new white paper is a distant prospect. Entering a long position now is like catching a falling knife, the bearish direction remains unchanged.
$NOM
SIGN rose 30% today, and I tried to judge whether this wave of increase has real buying support.
Trading volume is key.
Today's trading volume is nearly double the average of the past week, approaching $110 million. The simultaneous increase in volume and price indicates that there are indeed people buying, not just market makers washing trades.
However, "people are buying" and "this wave of increase can be sustained" are two different things.
The scenario I am most worried about is: the unlocking party sells some of the chips to market makers or institutions in advance off-market, and the latter gradually sells out at today’s price, while retail investors see the increase and rush in to take over. In this scenario, the trading volume is real, but the direction is flowing from the unlocking party to retail investors, not the other way around.
One method to judge these two scenarios is to look at the price 48 hours after unlocking—if the unlocking is smoothly absorbed by the market, the price can hold steady or even continue to rise; if unlocking triggers concentrated selling, those who rushed in today will face pressure within 48 hours.
A 30% single-day increase without news support, on the eve of the unlocking node, I tend to be cautious.
But there is one thing I admit I cannot judge: if there is an unpublished government contract progress for Sign, and this wave of increase is a real value reassessment, then my caution would be wrong. Asymmetrical information is the everlasting underlying issue in this market.
Let’s see after tomorrow.
@SignOfficial $SIGN
#Sign地缘政治基建
Trading volume is key.
Today's trading volume is nearly double the average of the past week, approaching $110 million. The simultaneous increase in volume and price indicates that there are indeed people buying, not just market makers washing trades.
However, "people are buying" and "this wave of increase can be sustained" are two different things.
The scenario I am most worried about is: the unlocking party sells some of the chips to market makers or institutions in advance off-market, and the latter gradually sells out at today’s price, while retail investors see the increase and rush in to take over. In this scenario, the trading volume is real, but the direction is flowing from the unlocking party to retail investors, not the other way around.
One method to judge these two scenarios is to look at the price 48 hours after unlocking—if the unlocking is smoothly absorbed by the market, the price can hold steady or even continue to rise; if unlocking triggers concentrated selling, those who rushed in today will face pressure within 48 hours.
A 30% single-day increase without news support, on the eve of the unlocking node, I tend to be cautious.
But there is one thing I admit I cannot judge: if there is an unpublished government contract progress for Sign, and this wave of increase is a real value reassessment, then my caution would be wrong. Asymmetrical information is the everlasting underlying issue in this market.
Let’s see after tomorrow.
@SignOfficial $SIGN
#Sign地缘政治基建
The article on the 25th that caused panic across the internet about 'market maker warnings' just happened to expose Sign's ultimate trump card in monopolizing token distribution.
On the 25th, Binance released that article warning about the risks of market makers, and my heart sank when I skimmed through it. At this critical moment to specifically name 'low circulation, high unlocking, and dark market-making', it's practically pointing a finger at the retail investors holding positions. Especially with tomorrow's unlocking big test looming, the market has been slipping down due to panic emotions these past few days. Feeling frustrated all day, I got up in the middle of the night and pored over the announcement word for word, suddenly realizing something.
What are the big shots at Binance complaining about? They are criticizing the project team for secretly selling tokens, blaming the unlocking schedule for not aligning with the market-making funds, and scolding retail investors for not being clear about who the tokens were distributed to. What they want is 'on-chain traceability and clear distribution'. Following this extremely mercenary regulatory logic, this is not a negative signal at all; it’s actually giving free global publicity to the TokenTable that Sign is holding. Others are being pressed down and checked for their shorts, while $SIGN
What are the big shots at Binance complaining about? They are criticizing the project team for secretly selling tokens, blaming the unlocking schedule for not aligning with the market-making funds, and scolding retail investors for not being clear about who the tokens were distributed to. What they want is 'on-chain traceability and clear distribution'. Following this extremely mercenary regulatory logic, this is not a negative signal at all; it’s actually giving free global publicity to the TokenTable that Sign is holding. Others are being pressed down and checked for their shorts, while $SIGN
【Diao Mao men, give me a boost】Shorting (Main Direction)
Entry: Open a short directly near the current price of $0.149, or wait for a rebound to $0.160～$0.170 to add positions
Stop Loss: Exit if it closes below $0.190
Target: First target $0.110, reduce half of the position; remaining to see if the contract converges with the spot, theoretical target $0.080～$0.090
Going Long: Not recommended, funding rates are costly.
In a nutshell:
Contracts are 100% more expensive than spot, this is not the time to go long, this is a free gift for shorts. Wait for the premium to converge and short with the trend.
$STO
Entry: Open a short directly near the current price of $0.149, or wait for a rebound to $0.160～$0.170 to add positions
Stop Loss: Exit if it closes below $0.190
Target: First target $0.110, reduce half of the position; remaining to see if the contract converges with the spot, theoretical target $0.080～$0.090
Going Long: Not recommended, funding rates are costly.
In a nutshell:
Contracts are 100% more expensive than spot, this is not the time to go long, this is a free gift for shorts. Wait for the premium to converge and short with the trend.
$STO
I see!
Who do you think he looks like?
Who do you think he looks like?
After listening to founder Xin Yan's 'old money social circle', I finally understood how excellent the foundation of SIGN's 'harvesting sovereignty' is.
Having been in this circle for a long time, the first thing I do when I see a new project is throw the white paper in the trash. It's easy to spend a few hundred bucks to hire someone to write a vision. I only focus on one thing: why do the operators, who clearly have easier ways to make money, choose to come and eat mud? Following this market-oriented 'testing people' logic, take a look at Sign founder Xin Yan. This guy was an early OG back in 2017, having invested in Coinbase, zkSync, and Optimism. He lacks neither the chips for getting rich nor the sharp vision. He could have comfortably lounged on a VC's leather sofa and guaranteed his profits, but instead, he chose to do the hardest infrastructure work—EthSign.
Login to explore more contents