There's a lot of smoke and mirrors in this space.
Market makers, volume that favors "the house", i.e. exchanges. Wash trading. Fake engagement. Fake web2 attention. Paid shills, paid pump and dumps. Premines, team/founder allocations. Quick rugs, slow rugs, etc.
One could go on forever probably listing things that this technology enables that make it hard to determine how legit a certain project is. This may also be a reason why some who turn out to be legit come out with huge profit margins later because majority didn't make it, or never planned to.
The reason I'm making this post is a bit split.
I noticed Vitalik has been selling off a lot of his Eth recently and even though you can see he's "investing" or "donating" it to some projects in the space that beneift the market as a whole or development, people seem to mostly care that he's selling the Eth because of how that may affect their own holdings.
I think we have some of that here as well.
I'm not saying everyone who sells Hive is doing it for the greater good and I'm neither saying that they shouldn't be allowed to sell for their own pockets, either.
There are however some projects that never really sell for the greater good, or re-invest them in developing the space further.
You can look at Hive from many different angles, I personally choose to do it from an angle where most of the time I deem it to be undervalued.
I know a lot of people who are investing in Hive's future and development heavily and that cost isn't even coming from hive itself.
I'm personally not able to invest more into Hive than what I've been able to as of late, so most of my activities are simply redirecting some of my Hive income into projects on Hive.
Do I wish I had sold more Hive when it was doing better to buy back a lot more hive now? Sure, but hindsight is always 20/20 and through all that time I wouldn't have been able to do what I love, curation. At least not as effectively if I had had to wait 4 years to buy stake back up, even if it'd been a lot more than what I could've earned in the meantime.
The thing I wanted to talk about however is that some projects out there may currently seem like they're down price/value wise, but what matters to me is what they're doing with the funding they have.
Naturally we can discuss the objectivity of what's good funding and what isn't, I know most readers here would disagree that all the money we spent on a rally car may not have been such a good idea.
The important part however is that we are trying. Where as some chains out there may not be.
Short term overshadowing of Hive's price/value is possible by other coins because they may not be spending much to begin with and may not be innovating or trying to build things so most of their inflation and supply may be heavily centralized which makes it a lot easier to move prices past "competitors". What matters however is long term value and health of the ecosystem as well as distribution of the token and decentralization.
I've spent almost a good decade here now trying to distribute hive as far and wide as I can. I understand most of those recipients are gone and may never return while most just can't afford to hold stake, but it's the thought and action that counts compared to some that may have never even attempted to do that, right?
Anyway, I feel like Hive is a bit in a similar position as my game I've been working on Holozing. A lot of things not fully finished but being worked on and when the puzzles finally do fall into place it's going to be exciting to see what comes of it.
Thanks for reading.