XRP is currently trading around $2.18 after a brief pullback, but market sentiment remains bullish. In a recent video, analyst Edward Farina made a comparison, claiming that buying XRP at this level is like buying Bitcoin when it was under $100.
Farina warns that many traders are trying to time the market by selling now and hoping to buy back at lower prices, a strategy he thinks will backfire for 95% of them. “The breakout doesn’t wait for your plan,” he warned.
Buying $XRP at $2 is the equivalent of buying BTC below $100.
And most people are trying to sell now to “buy back lower.”
That’s exactly how 95% will be priced out. The breakout doesn’t wait for your plan. pic.twitter.com/I0FQFdbDhb
Drawing from his own experience in 2019-2020, Farina admitted he repeatedly lost out while attempting to outsmart the market. He sees the same pattern unfolding today, with many XRP holders recently selling below $2, convinced a deeper crash was coming. Some even placed buy orders anticipating a 30–70% drop, only to watch the market sharply reverse and turn green, leaving them on the sidelines.
With influential figures like Arthur Britto resurfacing and several bullish catalysts emerging around XRP, it could be on the verge of a major breakout.
Farina advised keeping 90% of XRP in a cold wallet to avoid emotional selling and said to use only 10% for trading. His number one rule is to “Never sell your core XRP bag.”
According to him, XRP is the only asset that could “skyrocket overnight.” A single catalyst, like an official Swift partnership or a major central bank announcement, could send the price soaring. In such a scenario, those who sold XRP to save 20 or 30 cents might find themselves permanently priced out of the market.
XRP Under $2 Is a “Gift”
Analyst DustyBC says that XRP under $2 is a rare opportunity, predicting the market will look back by December 2025 and recognize its value. Crypto Bitlord agrees, calling XRP under $2 a gift, and has set a $7 target. He believes XRP may never dip below $2 again.
Never Miss a Beat in the Crypto World!
Stay ahead with breaking news, expert analysis, and real-time updates on the latest trends in Bitcoin, altcoins, DeFi, NFTs, and more.
While the token has not yet been launched, expectations are already swelling that the final unlock could bring in $1 billion to $2 billion, if not more.
“We have reached our deposit cap of $500 million. We are thrilled that 1,100+ wallets participated, with a median deposit amount of ~$35,000. Trillions,” Plasma announced.
Amid the headlines and hype, however, a deeper story is emerging. Concerns extend from whale domination and insider access to a growing sense that token launches are increasingly becoming gated events for the crypto elite.
The numbers show that only a handful of wallets accounted for outsized allocations. More specifically, the top three contributors alone deployed over $100 million collectively.
Perhaps more shocking, one user reportedly paid 39 ETH (approximately $104,871 at current rates of $2,689) in gas fees, which secured them a $10 million USDC allocation.
“This guy spent 100k in gas (230,000 Gwei) to get his deposit in for Plasma,” wrote MonaMoon, the founder of the Duck Frens NFT project.
User pays 39 ETH for a $10 million USDC allocation on Plasma ICO. Source: ManaMoon on X
This illustrates the intensity of FOMO and the lengths participants were willing to go to for early access. Notwithstanding, the frenzy has come at a reputational cost. With whales taking the lion’s share, many are calling this launch anything but fair.
“…it’s an obvious skip for the community…Only 100 wallets with $50 million each… these wallets alone will create an oversubscription of 100x… unfortunately, it’s not a fair launch, even though the price is very attractive,” warned an X user before the raise closed.
Despite offering just 10% of the total XPL token supply in the public sale at a $500 million FDV (fully diluted valuation), retail users were effectively pushed to the sidelines. They will likely only get in later, at 10x to 16x the price.
Critics Slam Plasma’s Tech and Tokenomics- ICO Was a Lockout, Not a Launch
This sharp disparity has some dubbing it a “whale sale,” rather than a launch accessible to the broader community. Further, there may be more than just bad optics at play. Crypto trader Hanzo raised serious red flags, suggesting possible coordinated insider behavior.
Hanzo calls out over 100 wallets, each receiving 48 million USDC, before the token even launched, highlighting that some of these wallets approved token interactions before the token contract went public.
“That means insiders had early access to mint and trade. This wasn’t a surprise launch — it was a private party. Retail wasn’t invited,” he claimed.
The mechanics of the raise also raise questions. Hosted on Sonar/Echo, dubbed by some as “the CoinList of this cycle,” a time-weighted share of vault deposits determined plasma’s deposit period.
Participants had to lock stablecoins on Ethereum, with a minimum 40-day lockup. However, with the deposit cap abruptly raised to $500 million and filled almost instantly, many users were left wondering whether this was ever meant to be an open opportunity.
Even the technology underpinning Plasma has not escaped scrutiny. A user broke down the chain’s architecture and found it lacking.
“Plasma is another L1 chain… It uses a ‘classic’ pBFT consensus layer, with Proof-of-Stake… and Bitcoin as ‘settlement’ by simply publishing state differences… It looks a lot like many alt-L1 EVM forks… It surfs on the Bitcoin “side-chain” marketing campaign and is pushed by influencors.. but I am not convinced at all,” the user noted.
In his view, Plasma’s use of influencers and Bitcoin branding is more marketing veneer than technical substance.
What makes this worse is how well it’s working.
Influencers are hyping it. Retail is showing up.
The liquidity is flowing — right where it needs to.
Still, not everyone agrees. Zaheer from SplitCapital praised the distribution, noting a broad holder distribution with over 1,100 wallets and only one wallet holding $50 million.
“All things considered insanely good distribution of holders for Plasma at $500m total size of deposit. Seeing a ton of folks with smaller amounts on here and only one entity with $50m in a wallet. Well done,” he stated in a post.
According to Zaheer, this contrasts with the typical whale-dominated ICOs and suggests a more inclusive allocation strategy.
Plasma’s ICO serves as a mirror to today’s market mechanics, where speed, size, and for some, connections, often matter more than innovation or accessibility.
Whether Plasma becomes a foundational chain or another cautionary tale will depend on the unlock numbers and how its ecosystem fairs beyond the ICO hype.
April 5, 2025, marks what would be the 50th birthday of Satoshi Nakamoto—the pseudonymous creator of Bitcoin. This alleged birthday is based on the date listed in his P2P Foundation profile.
While Nakamoto’s true identity remains unconfirmed, his legacy continues to shape the digital financial landscape. Here are five facts about the elusive Bitcoin architect:
April 5 Wasn’t Random
Nakamoto listed April 5, 1975, as his birthday—exactly 42 years after the US government banned private gold ownership under Executive Order 6102 on April 5, 1933, to stabilize the dollar.
Satoshi’s wallet, believed to hold 1.096 million BTC, has remained untouched since early 2010. Over the past decade, its value has risen more than 333-fold, now exceeding $91 billion.
Despite the wallet’s inactivity, CoinJoin transactions are regularly sent to its address. Some view this as an act of homage or a method of obfuscation.
Embedded in Bitcoin’s first block is the headline: “The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks.” The line is from a UK newspaper.
It is seen as a critique of centralized monetary policy and remains one of Nakamoto’s only public statements beyond technical documentation.
Fifteen years after its launch, Bitcoin remains secure and deflationary by design. Nakamoto’s codebase, while modified and improved by the open-source community, still forms the foundation of the network, securing over $1.6 trillion in value.
The GENIUS Act, a bill of proposed new stablecoin regulations for the US, is up for a Senate vote today. Still, its chances of success remain uncertain, as Democratic opposition remains high.
Democrats on the Senate Banking Committee released harsh criticism of the bill, and their staffers also circulated a scathing letter co-signed by 46 advocacy groups. This blowback took place despite recent bipartisan amendments.
However, this vote failed, and the Act currently faces a make-or-break chance to win again or start over:
“IMO, If the GENIUS Act doesn’t pass the Senate, there will be no meaningful legislation involving crypto before the midterms and, unfortunately, midterms historically go against the party in power. If they can’t get this passed, a more complex Market Structures Bill is highly unlikely… not to mention crypto-related tax legislation or consumer protections,” claimed crypto advocate John Deaton.
Reports claim that the GENIUS Act’s next chance will take place today as part of Senate proceedings that will begin at 3 PM EST.
The crypto industry is strongly in favor of these regulations, with advocacy groups and business leaders both saluting the bill. However, it may not be that easy for one clear reason: stiff Democratic opposition.
Despite some initial support, Congressional Democrats turned on the GENIUS Act due to concerns of legalized corruption and unfair business practices.
Last week, legislators proposed a few bipartisan amendments that would severely handcuff the bill with Big Tech exclusions and new enforcement mechanisms. It’s looking like that may not be enough.
According to several reports, the Senate Banking Committee’s Democrats released a scathing review of the GENIUS Act, and staffers also circulated a hostile letter co-signed by 46 different advocacy groups. These measures don’t necessarily reflect the bill’s chances of success, but they do highlight real opposition.
Democratic staff on the Senate Banking Committee sent around a letter this AM signed by several dozen advocacy orgs opposing the GENIUS Act.
Includes ACRE, AFR, Center for Responsible Lending, Our Revolution, Public Citizen, Tech Oversight Project… pic.twitter.com/pragFvzSKB
— Brendan Pedersen (@BrendanPedersen) May 19, 2025
These criticisms focused on a few key deficiencies. First of all, the GENIUS Act’s amendments would prevent publicly traded Big Tech companies from issuing stablecoins.
However, they wouldn’t stop private firms, notably including Elon Musk’s X. This is one of several alleged loopholes that could eventually lead to blurred lines between banking and commerce.
The letters also address consumer protection in the event of an issuer’s collapse. Considering that Tether and most other prominent stablecoin issuers aren’t US-based, critics worry that the GENIUS Act won’t guarantee users’ assets.
Most of the other concerns were adjacent to these major topics, worrying that the Act is wholly insufficient.
To be clear, it might still pass despite this opposition. The Senate Banking Committee and its allies clearly hate the GENIUS Act, but other Democrats might have a more favorable view. At the moment, we can only wait and see how the vote turns out.
(@DeFi_Hanzo) 
