No one originally expected that the 'top seat' of Ethereum corporate holdings would change hands within 35 days.
The company behind BitMine, represented by Tom Lee, has achieved: this once obscure small company on NASDAQ has increased its ETH holdings from zero to 830,000 pieces through a PIPE financing and three rounds of structured acquisitions, completing a dramatic turnover against SharpLink to become the world's largest ETH treasury.
This is not just a numerical victory or defeat, but a battle between two different lineages of capital—SharpLink, representing the 'crypto circle OG', slowly hoarding coins and waiting for the rise; BitMine, representing 'Wall Street power', realizing profits through pushing up prices. Low costs and high leverage, hoarding mentality and Narrative strategies, are a direct confrontation of two worldviews.
They are not just different ways of buying coins, but are competing for the answer to a question: in the next stage of crypto finance, who has the right to define the 'price' of ETH?
We are trying to understand this quietly occurring but sufficiently fierce industry shift from multiple perspectives.
💪Why are there two lineages of ETH?
If BitMine represents a structural raid in the style of Wall Street, then SharpLink's existence is precisely the continuation of the 'ETH native' logic.
The distinction between these two companies lies not only in their holding rhythm, disclosure methods, and Narrative strategies, but more importantly: they represent two vastly different origins and purposes.
SharpLink—The coins in the hands of OGs have been hoarded too long and moved too slowly. Dissecting SharpLink's shareholder lineup, it nearly covers the entire chain of capital in the Ethereum ecosystem.
The first category is the original lineage camp: Consensys (founded by ETH co-founder Joseph Lubin) controls core facilities like MetaMask and Infura, with Lubin serving as the chairman of SharpLink's board. The second category is the infrastructure camp: Pantera, Arrington, Primitive, etc., deeply engaged in Layer2, DeFi protocols, and cross-chain facilities. The third category is the financialization camp: Galaxy Digital, GSR, Ondo Finance, etc., directly operate in ETH's institutionalization, derivatives, and custody businesses, making their holdings manageable and value-enhancing institutional assets.
This capital binding not only amplifies SharpLink's 'ETH treasury' narrative, but also provides resource leverage for its buying, staking, and reducing positions, becoming a bridge for Wall Street to understand ETH.
The initial ETH holding structure also reflects this 'OG attribute': sourced from internal transfers within the team wallet rather than the public market; single purchase sizes are small, but the distribution cycle is extremely long; emphasizing safety, liquidity management, and audit cooperation.
According to financial reports and on-chain estimates, SharpLink's ETH acquisition cost range is concentrated between $1,500 and $1,800, with some early holdings costing even less than $1,000. Because of this, the proportion of 'hoarding' faction in its shareholder structure is extremely high, and when the price returns to around $4,000, it would not be surprising to see natural selling pressure.
Moreover, as early as June 12, SharpLink submitted a document named S-ASR, the core content of which is that—once the registration takes effect, the stocks can be sold immediately.
This path is not wrong, but it naturally brings three problems: the OG team's 'hoarding' mentality makes it more focused on cost-benefit ratios; once the coin price rises sharply, it easily triggers the impulse to reduce positions; under the OG network, the information flow is more closed and cautious, and does not tend to actively play the Narrative card; prioritizing on-chain operations, it appears lagging in aspects such as financial reporting efficiency and capital market operations.
✌✌✌This is precisely the deeper reason why, in the third quarter of 2025, SharpLink seemed a beat behind when facing BitMine's rhythmic strategy of 'disclosure - financing - increasing positions - raising prices'.
In contrast, BitMine has almost arrived in the ETH race with the posture of 'typical Wall Street capital entering the fray'. First, the PIPE financing structure itself is full of financial engineering implications: it uses a combination of cash + warrants + ETH subscription structure; participants include mainstream U.S. stock structured investors like Galaxy Digital, ARK Invest, Founders Fund; the distribution of chips is transparent, with a lock-up period set, which is conducive to stabilizing valuation models.✌ We can also catch a glimpse of clues from the backgrounds of its board members—many come from investment banks, private equity, and hedge funds, familiar with PIPE financing, compliance arbitrage, and refinancing cycles. In their eyes, ETH is not a 'digital currency', but a new type of financial asset that is 'priceable, tradable, and convertible'.
The differences between OG and Wall Street are not just in rhythm, but also in conflicting motives.
This has forced SharpLink to begin contemplating whether just having OG's ETH is enough?
💪They seem to have provided a new answer to this question—starting from August 7, they introduced new Wall Street institutional investors to participate in their $200 million registered directed issuance.
💪This is a 'power transfer' of the Ethereum narrative: gradually shifting from the OGs to the hands of capital that can explain financial reports, tell good stories, and run structures effectively.💪
The future may not necessarily belong to BitMine alone, but it is foreseeable that the next round of ETH pricing power will no longer be determined by crypto circle OGs, but by who masters the Narrative structure, who can secure more Wall Street financing, and who will have more 'narrative chips'.