Having been deeply involved with the SATs project, the gas consumption during the initial minting was truly staggering—just the minting fee alone cost $80 million, a figure that stands out even more today. Looking at the current price trend, it has basically fallen below the issuance price, but this also means that the risk has been fully realized.
From a chip perspective, the early accumulation by institutions and major holders has basically come to an end, and the market is now mainly composed of retail investors' holdings. This is a key turning point. If new capital sees the potential of this IP and enters the market, the upward potential is theoretically considerable; if no one takes the bait, it will continue down the death spiral. But there's a logical question—would a well-known IP in such a competitive track really have no capital willing to come in?
From a game theory perspective, accumulating some chips at the bottom stage now and holding for one to two years could yield several times the return, which is not an unrealistic expectation. Even if the project doesn't rebound as expected, given the current price levels, the loss space is extremely limited. This high-probability, low-risk allocation approach is indeed attractive to long-term participants.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
12 Likes
Reward
12
11
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
MrDecoder
· 2025-12-31 00:45
The $80 million minting fee has been poured in, and now it's trading below the issuance price. This move is indeed a bit embarrassing.
The chips have already been fully dispersed. Now, it depends on whether new money is willing to step in. It feels like this game still has to continue.
View OriginalReply0
DeFiCaffeinator
· 2025-12-30 15:21
80 million dollars in gas fees is truly outrageous; this wave definitely took a lot of naive investors for a ride.
View OriginalReply0
HappyBiker
· 2025-12-30 03:25
Just go for it💪
View OriginalReply1
HappyBiker
· 2025-12-30 03:25
Hop on board!🚗
View OriginalReply1
MindsetExpander
· 2025-12-29 09:21
80 million dollars worth of gas fees poured in just for it to be like this now? LOL
View OriginalReply0
GateUser-b644ef4c
· 2025-12-28 13:39
The article is well-written overall, but it is incorrect to say there are no institutional holdings.
View OriginalReply0
POAPlectionist
· 2025-12-28 12:54
80 million gas fees poured in just for this crappy state now, hilarious
View OriginalReply0
VibesOverCharts
· 2025-12-28 12:48
80 million gas fees have already been spent. Do you still dare to buy in? Are you crazy?
View OriginalReply0
BuyHighSellLow
· 2025-12-28 12:47
80 million gas fees poured in, now falling below the issuance price. This wave is indeed quite ironic.
View OriginalReply0
GasGrillMaster
· 2025-12-28 12:36
80 million gas fees burned to ashes, and now you still want to play the bottom-fishing strategy? Pfft, if you're so confident, why haven't institutions continued to add to their positions?
Having been deeply involved with the SATs project, the gas consumption during the initial minting was truly staggering—just the minting fee alone cost $80 million, a figure that stands out even more today. Looking at the current price trend, it has basically fallen below the issuance price, but this also means that the risk has been fully realized.
From a chip perspective, the early accumulation by institutions and major holders has basically come to an end, and the market is now mainly composed of retail investors' holdings. This is a key turning point. If new capital sees the potential of this IP and enters the market, the upward potential is theoretically considerable; if no one takes the bait, it will continue down the death spiral. But there's a logical question—would a well-known IP in such a competitive track really have no capital willing to come in?
From a game theory perspective, accumulating some chips at the bottom stage now and holding for one to two years could yield several times the return, which is not an unrealistic expectation. Even if the project doesn't rebound as expected, given the current price levels, the loss space is extremely limited. This high-probability, low-risk allocation approach is indeed attractive to long-term participants.