The post Tether hasn’t saved this OOB stock from a 99.9% YTD loss appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. If an investor were to read the SEC filings of VCI Global, they may find it difficult to understand its risky ties to Tether and Solana. Amid a sort of information vacuum and other executive disappointments in 2025, holding shares of VCI Global since their open of trading on a “100 million OOB token digital-asset-treasury transaction” announcement would have earned a 31% loss in less than four weeks. Longer term shareholders have performed even worse. Anyone’s investment since the start of the year has suffered a catastrophic, 99.9% loss. Year-to-date chart of VCI Global. Source: TradingView Oobit (OOB) is a tap-to-pay app that uses its proprietary token as well as stablecoins like Tether (USDT) for mobile device payments. VCI Global is a microcap Nasdaq stock with a market capitalization in the single-digit millions and a float of less than 24,000 shares. The company is based in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, and apparently has a problem with CEO impersonation fraud, according to a prominent notice on the company’s homepage. That’s just the beginning of its problems. On November 26, the company claimed to have acquired 4,174,603 additional OOB tokens “from the open market,” yet that disclosure refrained from mentioning that it acquired the vast majority of its OOB without any purchases, devoid of market forces from exchange listings of OOB. Specifically, the company already owned 250 million OOB tokens — priced before the token was trading on Kraken or other major exchanges. Its 4.1 million token purchase at $0.24 was merely an investment of $1 million. The company characterized the tiny purchase and 1.6% increase as the “initial phase of our US$50 million accumulation plan.” Focusing on what actually matters, 98.4% of the company’s OOB holdings were transferred by investors who received 50 million shares worth of VCI Global stock and pre-funded, immediately… The post Tether hasn’t saved this OOB stock from a 99.9% YTD loss appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. If an investor were to read the SEC filings of VCI Global, they may find it difficult to understand its risky ties to Tether and Solana. Amid a sort of information vacuum and other executive disappointments in 2025, holding shares of VCI Global since their open of trading on a “100 million OOB token digital-asset-treasury transaction” announcement would have earned a 31% loss in less than four weeks. Longer term shareholders have performed even worse. Anyone’s investment since the start of the year has suffered a catastrophic, 99.9% loss. Year-to-date chart of VCI Global. Source: TradingView Oobit (OOB) is a tap-to-pay app that uses its proprietary token as well as stablecoins like Tether (USDT) for mobile device payments. VCI Global is a microcap Nasdaq stock with a market capitalization in the single-digit millions and a float of less than 24,000 shares. The company is based in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, and apparently has a problem with CEO impersonation fraud, according to a prominent notice on the company’s homepage. That’s just the beginning of its problems. On November 26, the company claimed to have acquired 4,174,603 additional OOB tokens “from the open market,” yet that disclosure refrained from mentioning that it acquired the vast majority of its OOB without any purchases, devoid of market forces from exchange listings of OOB. Specifically, the company already owned 250 million OOB tokens — priced before the token was trading on Kraken or other major exchanges. Its 4.1 million token purchase at $0.24 was merely an investment of $1 million. The company characterized the tiny purchase and 1.6% increase as the “initial phase of our US$50 million accumulation plan.” Focusing on what actually matters, 98.4% of the company’s OOB holdings were transferred by investors who received 50 million shares worth of VCI Global stock and pre-funded, immediately…

Tether hasn’t saved this OOB stock from a 99.9% YTD loss

For feedback or concerns regarding this content, please contact us at crypto.news@mexc.com

If an investor were to read the SEC filings of VCI Global, they may find it difficult to understand its risky ties to Tether and Solana.

Amid a sort of information vacuum and other executive disappointments in 2025, holding shares of VCI Global since their open of trading on a “100 million OOB token digital-asset-treasury transaction” announcement would have earned a 31% loss in less than four weeks.

Longer term shareholders have performed even worse. Anyone’s investment since the start of the year has suffered a catastrophic, 99.9% loss.

Year-to-date chart of VCI Global. Source: TradingView

Oobit (OOB) is a tap-to-pay app that uses its proprietary token as well as stablecoins like Tether (USDT) for mobile device payments.

VCI Global is a microcap Nasdaq stock with a market capitalization in the single-digit millions and a float of less than 24,000 shares.

The company is based in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, and apparently has a problem with CEO impersonation fraud, according to a prominent notice on the company’s homepage.

That’s just the beginning of its problems. On November 26, the company claimed to have acquired 4,174,603 additional OOB tokens “from the open market,” yet that disclosure refrained from mentioning that it acquired the vast majority of its OOB without any purchases, devoid of market forces from exchange listings of OOB.

Specifically, the company already owned 250 million OOB tokens — priced before the token was trading on Kraken or other major exchanges. Its 4.1 million token purchase at $0.24 was merely an investment of $1 million.

The company characterized the tiny purchase and 1.6% increase as the “initial phase of our US$50 million accumulation plan.”

Focusing on what actually matters, 98.4% of the company’s OOB holdings were transferred by investors who received 50 million shares worth of VCI Global stock and pre-funded, immediately exercisable warrants.

Tether’s PIPE gets the cheap price on OOB

Those 250 million tokens were favorably priced at $0.20 — 73% lower than their $0.73 high within a 48-hour period of that headline. 

Brazenly, the company claimed that this 250 million token transfer “paid” — with no actual cash transaction nor placement agent — for VCI Global’s entire $50 million Private Investment in Public Equity (PIPE).

On the other side of that deal, Tether Investment Limited received 39.8% of the PIPE shares. 

Straddling both sides of the deal, Tether is also a top investor in OOB, leading its Series A fundraise, alongside Solana co-founder Anatoly Yakavenko.

In other words, an entity agreeing to the pricing of the OOB tokens was the same entity receiving the majority of the PIPE shares.

Read more: Tether took over the White House, now it’s tearing it down to build a ballroom

This whole thing relies on Kraken keeping OOB up for trading

According to Cory Klippsten, a Tether critic who has been involved in litigation against the stablecoin giant, “This structure lets an effective change of control happen without triggering a 13D.”

Klippsten characterized the lack of VCI Global’s SEC Form 13D plus other factors “a possible material breach of SEC Rule 12b-20.”

Protos doesn’t have a view on that allegation, and only a US securities attorney could provide advice regarding those forms.

The timing, pricing, and catering of both sides of the deal to related parties is certainly interesting. Kraken and other exchanges like KCEX activated trading pairs of the OOB token within 48 hours of the November 10 VCI Global deal.

In fact, a substantial portion of the deal explicitly relies on Kraken’s OOB trading pair staying up and operational.

If Kraken suspends or withdraws its OOB listing within six months, VCI Global “shall have the right to rescind this agreement” by returning OOB and reversing the VCI Global shares issued.

Got a tip? Send us an email securely via Protos Leaks. For more informed news, follow us on X, Bluesky, and Google News, or subscribe to our YouTube channel.

Source: https://protos.com/tether-hasnt-saved-this-oob-stock-from-a-99-9-ytd-loss/

Market Opportunity
Threshold Logo
Threshold Price(T)
$0.005985
$0.005985$0.005985
-1.05%
USD
Threshold (T) Live Price Chart
Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact crypto.news@mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

USDH Power Struggle Ignites Stablecoin “Bidding Wars” Across DeFi: Bloomberg

USDH Power Struggle Ignites Stablecoin “Bidding Wars” Across DeFi: Bloomberg

A heated contest for control over a new dollar-pegged token has set the stage for what analysts say could define the next phase of the stablecoin industry. According to Bloomberg, a bidding war unfolded on Hyperliquid, one of crypto’s fastest-growing trading platforms, with the prize being the right to issue USDH, its native stablecoin. The competition drew some of the sector’s most prominent names, including Paxos, Sky, and Ethena, who later withdrew their bid, alongside the lesser-known Native Markets, a startup backed by Stripe stablecoin subsidiary Bridge. Hyperliquid Stablecoin Race Shows Branding and Partnerships Matter as Much as Tech Over the weekend, Hyperliquid’s validators, the contributors who secure the network and vote on key decisions, awarded the USDH contract to Native Markets over the weekend. Despite its relatively new status, the firm’s connection with Stripe helped it outpace more established rivals. Stablecoins underpin decentralized finance by providing a dollar-backed medium for collateral, settlement, and payments across applications. What began as a grassroots, community-led sector has evolved into a battleground for institutions and payment companies seeking revenue from interest on reserves. Circle, for example, shares proceeds from its USDC with Coinbase under a partnership designed to stabilize earnings during market swings. The Hyperliquid contest offered a rare glimpse into just how intense competition has become. Paxos pledged to take no revenue until USDH surpassed $1 billion in circulation. Agora offered to share 100% of net revenue with Hyperliquid, while Ethena put forward 95%. All were outbid by Native Markets, whose ties to Stripe’s $1.1 billion acquisition of Bridge and subsequent rollout of the Tempo blockchain positioned it as a strong contender. “Every stablecoin issuer is extremely desperate for supply,” said Zaheer Ebtikar, co-founder of Split Capital. “They are willing to publicly announce how much they are willing to offer. It just shows it’s a very tough business for stablecoin issuers.” While USDC remains dominant on Hyperliquid with more than $5.6 billion in deposits, the arrival of USDH could shift flows and revenue dynamics. Paxos co-founder Bhau Kotecha said the firm sees the exchange’s growth as an important opportunity, while Agora’s co-founder Nick van Eck warned that awarding the contract to a vertically integrated issuer risked undermining decentralization. Regulatory positioning also factored into the debate. Paxos operates under a New York trust charter and is seeking a federal license, while Bridge holds money transmitter approvals in 30 states. Native Markets, in a blog post, cited regulatory flexibility and deployment speed as reasons for its selection. Hyperliquid said the strong engagement from its community validated the process. Circle CEO Jeremy Allaire dismissed concerns over USDC’s status, noting on X that competition benefits the ecosystem. Analysts suggested that fears of centralization may be exaggerated, noting that Hyperliquid is likely to remain neutral and support multiple stablecoins. Still, the contest over USDH highlighted a new reality for stablecoins: branding, partnerships, and business strategy are becoming as decisive as technology. Native Markets Secures USDH Stablecoin Mandate on Hyperliquid Hyperliquid has concluded its governance vote for the USDH stablecoin, awarding the mandate to Native Markets after a closely watched process that drew weeks of community debate and rival proposals. USDH, described by Hyperliquid as a “Hyperliquid-first, compliant, and natively minted” dollar-backed token, is intended to reduce the platform’s dependence on USDC and strengthen its spot markets. Validators on the decentralized exchange voted in favor of Native Markets, a relatively new player backed by Stripe’s Bridge subsidiary, over established contenders including Paxos and Ethena. The outcome followed a string of proposals offering aggressive revenue-sharing terms to win validator support, underscoring the scale of incentives attached to controlling USDH. Hyperliquid’s exchange has become a critical hub for stablecoin liquidity, with $5.7 billion in USDC, around 8% of its total supply, currently held on the network. At prevailing treasury yields, that translates to an estimated $200 million to $220 million in annual revenue for Circle, underlining why a native alternative could be transformative. Hyperliquid’s validators, who secure the network and vote on key decisions, selected Native Markets following an on-chain governance process that concluded September 15. Native Markets has laid out a phased rollout for USDH, beginning with capped minting and redemption trials before expanding into spot markets. Its reserves will be managed in cash and treasuries by BlackRock, with on-chain tokenization through Superstate and Bridge. Yield from those reserves will be split between Hyperliquid’s Assistance Fund and ecosystem development. The launch of USDH comes as Hyperliquid records record profits from perpetual futures trading, with $106 million in revenue in August alone, and prepares to slash spot trading fees by 80% to bolster liquidity. Analysts say the move positions Hyperliquid to capture more of the stablecoin economics internally, marking a significant step in its bid to rival the largest players in decentralized finance
Share
CryptoNews2025/09/18 00:48
Bitcoin Market Faces Renewed Pressure: What Lies Ahead?

Bitcoin Market Faces Renewed Pressure: What Lies Ahead?

The post Bitcoin Market Faces Renewed Pressure: What Lies Ahead? appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Recent data reveals heightened instability in the cryptocurrency
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2026/03/31 01:21
BTC fell below $67,000, down 0.94% on the day.

BTC fell below $67,000, down 0.94% on the day.

PANews reported on March 31 that, according to OKX market data, BTC has just fallen below $67,000 and is currently trading at $66,989.20 per coin, down 0.94% on
Share
PANews2026/03/31 01:22