English
10373
 Regarding the mining of Ethereum 2.0 POS, a big news suddenly broke out in the past few days. Before sharing this big news, let me first introduce to you a basic knowledge of Ethereum POS mortgage mining (also known as beacon chain mining): How do users participate in beacon chain mining? The process probably looks like this: Users call their ETH to the service provider, and the service provider mortgages the ETH into the beacon chain for pledge mining. At the same time, the service provider will issue an ETH voucher token to the user. This voucher token is equivalent to a receipt of ETH. If the user spends 5 ETH, they will receive 5 ETH voucher tokens. stETH is a certificate token provided by a service provider called Lido. In the future, when the beacon chain is officially launched, users can find Lido with stETH and exchange it for ETH on the beacon chain. Note that the ETH exchanged at this time is not our current ETH, but the future ETH on the beacon chain, because there are differences in technical implementation between the two. Let us call this future ETH ETH2.0 to distinguish it from our current ETH. But in terms of value, ETH2.0 and ETH should theoretically be the same. Well, in this case, if there are no problems with the service provider (such as running away, cheating, etc.), each stETH can be exchanged for an ETH2.0, but this time point will not be until the beacon chain is online. But what if some users holding stETH cannot wait that long and need ETH now? Because theoretically stETH can be exchanged for ETH2.0 in the future, and ETH2.0 is theoretically the same value as ETH, so theoretically, the market price of stETH should be almost the same as that of ETH. Therefore, on Curve, the largest decentralized exchange, there is a trading pair of stETH and ETH. Under normal circumstances, the price of the two is basically 1:1, that is, the same value. But there is a premise: that is "under normal circumstances". So what is normal? That is, everyone has great confidence in stETH, so that the two-way transaction volume between stETH and ETH is basically the same, and the prices of the two can be basically equal. The big thunder we are going to talk about next subverts this "normal situation". Celsius is a relatively well-known traditional encryption company. It provides various crypto-asset services to ordinary users, including users depositing ETH to it, and it will repay the principal and interest to the user after maturity. And just recently, Celsius suddenly made a big announcement: This company pledged more than 40,000 ETH to Stakehound, the Ethereum 2.0 pledge service provider, last year to participate in the mining of the Ethereum 2.0 beacon chain. However, Stakehound lost a considerable portion of its mortgaged ETH last year due to the loss of its private key, which also dragged Stakehound users to bear this heavy loss. Among these customers is Celsius. In other words, Celsius has lost a large amount of ETH forever. This Lei has been concealed for so long and has only been exposed now. This caused great dissatisfaction among Celsius users and severely damaged their confidence in it. “"The house leaked but it rained all night" --- Affected by this incident, people began to analyze Celsius's ETH holdings to see if there was any bigger thunder. The good guys dug up this information: In fact, Celsius does not retain all the ETH it receives from users. It only retains 27% of the total amount.； 44% of the total amount was given to Lido for mining the beacon chain and stETH was obtained, so 44% of the total amount was stETH tokens. ； There are also 29% that mine the beacon chain themselves, and according to what we explained earlier, these 29% cannot get ETH2.0 until the beacon chain goes online. Therefore, in fact, only 27% of the ETH that Celsius can immediately return to users, and the remaining 44% if users also come to withdraw funds, Celsius must take the 44% stETH to Curve and exchange it for ETH before returning it to users. And when the 44% has been withdrawn, if anyone still wants to withdraw ETH, Celsius will have to fill the hole, and there is a high probability that it will go bankrupt. Inferring from this logic, Celsius may sell a large amount of stETH in the future in exchange for ETH to return it to users, and it is very likely to go bankrupt. And all of this may happen in the last few months or two months. If this happens, the prerequisite for the stable trading pair of stETH and ETH in Curve that we mentioned earlier will no longer exist, and stETH will plummet. As soon as this news came out, the market suddenly became tense in the past two days, and a large number of users began to actively sell stETH and buy back ETH on Curve. This caused stETH and ETH to become unanchored, the prices of the two no longer met 1:1, and the price of stETH began to be significantly discounted. To make matters worse, the day before yesterday, another institution that held a large amount of stETH also began to sell stETH on Curve. This caused stETH to further discount. In response to this situation, Lido, the issuer of stETH, publicly stated yesterday: No matter what the market prices of stETH and ETH are, Lido will strictly guarantee that stETH will pay ETH2.0 in full. In this regard, there are now two voices on the market: One is to avoid this risk quickly, and would rather lose some money than sell stETH first and exchange it for ETH at least.； Another voice is: there is no problem with stETH in this process. The de-anchoring of stETH and ETH is purely a serious price distortion caused by market panic. You can wait a little longer. When Celsius's thunder breaks out, stETH will plummet. At that time, you can buy stETH at a very low discount price, and use this discounted stETH to redeem ETH2.0 with the same current value in the future. This is a God-given opportunity. This matter is fermenting rapidly now, and we will wait and see what will happen next. In the blockchain world, welcome to communicate and discuss together! Author WeChat: 730730  Risk warning: Investment is risky. The content is just personal analysis and reference only. It does not constitute investment advice. Maybe what I said is wrong, so you should be careful.  |
|
|
|
|
|
