VIKTOR

Why is $VVV only buying back $200k a month if they are going to have $100M+ yearly revenue?

May 20

$VVV is a good example to see how the sheer ROI of a coin pump is less relevant to call a top on it than the trading volume. Despite being now up more than 10x from bottom (which is probably the best performance YTD for a non-scam coin), there are no "strong" sign of VVV being topped. The largest volume day was just a bit more than $500M, which is quite limited and suggests that we're far from saturation in terms of attention or inflows. Obviously, you have to be aware that most coins top wit

Apr 28

Basically the same argument as Rob yesterday, which confirms how bad the deal is for $VVV tokenholders. "Oh you thought VVV wasn't just a way to hedge compute costs? Too bad for you! But we have both equity and token, so we're fine hehe" Let's repeat what I said yesterday in a much longer tweet: when a crypto protocol launches a token, it does automatically benefit from the inflows of a ton of buyers who will consider it a "pseudo-equity". Even if the team explains that the token has XYZ util

Jul 4

Textbook rounded top for the best performing token of 2026 so far $VVV https://t.co/oVryro02HN

Jun 19

Slowly getting there for $VVV R/R is getting worse for shorts here with the risk of a bounce that would erase profits But I also wouldn't be shocked if this just bleeds for months now https://t.co/2E7uNbZqdO

Jul 13

@AviFelman Only $HYPE does genuinely drive value to its token $VVV has the usual token<>equity conflict and $TON is sold to make Telegram money

May 21

@ErikVoorhees You mean that thing where the equity holders accrue the value, or is this model different?

May 20

@ErikVoorhees So it's the same token<>equity conflict model as usual, fair enough

May 20

@AskVenice $1 burn per new subscription? wtf Better not to have a buyback & burn mechanism than having such a ridiculously small one

Apr 16