hodler

8 May 2026, 11:25

Chinese rivals roll out competing models as Tesla shows signs of growth

Tesla’s China production factory showed strong results compared to 2025. However, these recent numbers signal American automakers are also losing ground as Chinese rivals step up with new launches. The company’s Shanghai plant shipped 79,478 vehicles in April, which marked a 36% jump from April 2025. These numbers include both cars sold within China and those sent to other countries, according to data from the China Passenger Car Association. But when compared to the month before, April shipments actually fell by 7.2%. This decline points to tougher conditions in the Chinese market, where local manufacturers have introduced many new models recently. Eric Han works as a senior manager at Suolei, a consultancy based in Shanghai. He said Tesla (NASDAQ: TSLA) still holds a solid position in China’s electric car market, calling monthly shipments above 70,000 vehicles noteworthy. However, he warned the company might struggle to keep growing at the same pace in upcoming months as Chinese buyers show more interest in vehicles made by domestic manufacturers. Looking at the broader picture, Tesla’s Shanghai operations sold 292,876 cars during the first four months of 2026. This represented a 26.7% increase compared to the same period last year. Electric car sales across China had a rough start to the year. The first two months saw slower activity as the central government gradually reduced purchase subsidies and tax breaks. Things picked up again in March when local authorities stepped in with their own subsidies and car companies offered attractive financing deals to bring in new buyers. Canada questions fair access as Tesla moves to capture low-tariff quota Meanwhile, Tesla (NASDAQ: TSLA) recently rolled out a new Model 3 range in Canada, as reported by Cryptopolitan , all built at its Chinese factory. The cheapest version starts at C$39,490, making it among the lowest-priced Tesla models the company has ever put on sale. That might not benefit Tesla, as Canadian government officials are now considering limits on how many vehicles each automaker can be allowed to sell under the new agreement with China. The worry is that one company could use up most of the available spots before newer brands like BYD (HKG: 1211) and other Chinese automakers get a chance to enter the Canadian market. Earlier this year, Canada struck a dea l with China that changed the tariff structure. The old rate of 106.1% on Chinese-made electric cars dropped to just 6.1% for up to 49,000 vehicles each year. For the first year, this total got split into two equal periods of six months each, allowing 24,500 cars in each window. Tesla moved fast to take advantage. In March, the company pulled all Model 3 inventory from its Canadian operations. It even took demo cars from showrooms and sent them back to the United States. The online system where customers could order vehicles also went offline to stop people from buying American-made versions. Global Affairs Canada confirmed this week that no import permits have been used yet, even though applications opened on March 1. Government officials are also talking about what happens when the first period ends on August 31. Right now, the first 24,500 vehicles work on a first-come, first-served basis. The remaining cars for the first year will be allocated through February 2027. Traditional carmakers bet on Chinese partnerships In Europe, traditional carmakers are taking a different approach. Stellantis, which owns Jeep, announced plans Friday to expand its partnership with Chinese electric car maker Leapmotor. Stellantis (NYSE: STLA) bought about 21% of Leapmotor (HKG: 9863) back in 2023, and the two companies created a joint operation to sell and build Leapmotor vehicles outside China. The expanded partnership will focus on increasing production while cutting costs. In Spain, they are looking at adding manufacturing capacity at a Stellantis plant in Zaragoza. This could include a new production line for an electric SUV from the Opel brand. Leapmotor might also build its B10 model at the same facility, which would let both companies share components. The B10 could start rolling off the line this year, while the Opel SUV might begin production in 2028. Another Stellantis factory in Villaverde, Madrid, could start making a new Leapmotor vehicle in 2028 as well. If you're reading this, you’re already ahead. Stay there with our newsletter .

8 May 2026, 11:21

Arbitrum DAO Votes to Unlock $70 Million for Kelp DAO Exploit Relief

Arbitrum DAO voted to release the Kelp exploit funds, but a U.S. Court restraining notice has put the approved transfer in legal jeopardy.

8 May 2026, 11:18

Exclusive: Fahmi Syed says Midnight can fix the problem JP Morgan, Goldman and Citi are creating

Cryptopolitan sat down for a chat with Fahmi Syed, President of Midnight Foundation, at Consensus Miami, where he told Karnika E. Yashwant, better known as Mr. KEY, founder and CEO of KEY Difference Media, that every bank on Wall Street wants its own lane, but clients still need to deal across the whole road. Fahmi pointed at JPMorgan Chase (NYSE: JPM), Goldman Sachs (NYSE: GS), and Citigroup (NYSE: C) as examples of major institutions building private blockchain systems that may improve things inside each bank while making life harder across banks. OpenSea CMO says private bank chains are creating a new access problem for clients Fahmi said the irony is hard to miss. “Who would have thought five years ago JP Morgan would be at a Web3 convention?” he said. “So what their JP Morgan coin allows is internally for them, for their clients to utilize that rail. It gives better transparency across departments, better maybe efficiencies across global entities. But actually, it’s… less efficient than the existing TradFi rails.” A client at Morgan Stanley (NYSE: MS) still cannot simply settle or buy an asset from another bank’s chain, like all these shiny systems magically understand each other. Fahmi said that right there is the part Midnight wants to attack. Fahmi said the real problem is: when a hedge fund banks with JPMorgan and Goldman Sachs at the same time, but they run separate private chains, then the client has no clean way to use one chain’s asset position inside the other chain’s system. Karnika E. Yashwant (MR. KEY) with Fahmi Syed, the President of Midnight Foundation at Consensus Miami. Credits: Mr. KEY “How does that same client move an asset from Goldman’s to JP Morgan? They can’t,” Fahmi said. “With Midnight, we could be a privacy layer that can provide proof that that client is the same client.” He added that Midnight could help with “identity, but access, agency, and much more beyond that.” Mr. KEY then asked Fahmi: “So you are looking at yourself being integrated with all these other kinds of competing chains?” Fahmi answered that: “We see ourselves as a unifying layer,” adding that Midnight wants to be “a ubiquitous privacy layer that any other network can use.” Fahmi said KYC is one simple example. Every chain is trying to build some identity system, which means users could end up repeating the same checks across different networks. His version is different. One private identity proof could sit on Midnight, and other networks could check it when needed. That could matter for Solana, bank chains, lending apps, and other systems that need proof without exposing the full user file. Midnight believes users should not have to bridge or hand over assets Mr. KEY then asked the bridge question because that is where crypto usually starts sweating. “Do you think this causes any situation like bridge challenges?” he asked. Fahmi said no, because: “Our tokenomics is different. In every other network, it is tribalist. You have to own the token to access the network, and the token that you own for capital ownership is the very token you cannibalize to pay for your transactions. So it creates a tribalist environment.” With Midnight, Fahmi said the Knight token is meant to separate access from ownership. “In Midnight, you have a Knight token that gives away free gas,” he said. He added that users could lease or delegate gas access instead of buying into the network just to use it. “Technology is consumed, it’s very rarely owned,” Fahmi said. Mr. KEY asked him, “But are users actually bridging the tokens?” Fahmi, again, said the answer is no since “they don’t have to bridge.” The asset can stay on the original chain, whether that is a bank’s, Solana’s, Aave’s, or any other, because the user would simply show cryptographic proof that the asset exists and that they own it. Fahmi Syed, the President of Midnight Foundation with Charles Hoskinson, the founder of Cardano and the CEO of Input Output Global (IOG), at Consensus Miami. Credits: Mr. KEY That part caught Mr. KEY’s attention because of his own personal experience. “I’m one of the largest stakers with EtherFi,” he told Fahmi. “I do borrow against it,” but said he is not comfortable putting funds inside a custodian’s setup. “If I could have it at my end and borrow against it, it would be perfect,” Mr. KEY said. Fahmi said Midnight Foundation is not trying to become the lender, the bank, or the custody provider. “I’m not going to be a bank. I’m not going to be a custodian,” he said. Instead, the plan is to provide rails that others can build on. He said those rails could let someone create “the first decentralized system” for this kind of lending. Mr. KEY also asked the money question. “And your monetization?” he said. Fahmi said revenue could come from network activity and delegated gas fees as more people use Midnight, which could involve a custodian, a foundation, or even another operator delegating the fee asset. Mr. KEY then wondered: “Is that going to be a sufficient revenue stream? Because most chains suffer from not having actual revenue.” Fahmi told Mr. KEY, “Time will tell. If I had a crystal ball, I would not be standing here.”

8 May 2026, 10:50

Cango Mined 230 BTC in April, Treasury Reaches 1,057 Bitcoin

BitcoinWorld Cango Mined 230 BTC in April, Treasury Reaches 1,057 Bitcoin Nasdaq-listed Bitcoin mining company Cango (CANG) has reported mining 230.04 Bitcoin through its own operations during the month of April. The Shanghai-headquartered firm disclosed the figures in a press release issued via PR Newswire, providing transparency into its production costs and treasury position. Production Costs and Operational Efficiency Cango’s average mining cost for April stood at $68,061 per Bitcoin. This metric, which includes electricity, hosting, and operational expenses, is closely watched by investors as a measure of mining profitability. With Bitcoin trading well above that level for most of the month, the company’s operations remained comfortably profitable. The cost figure reflects the efficiency of Cango’s mining fleet and its access to competitive power rates. Bitcoin Treasury Grows As of April 30, Cango held a total of 1,057.46 Bitcoin on its balance sheet. This marks a steady accumulation strategy, as the company has been adding to its treasury through retained production rather than secondary market purchases. The holding positions Cango among mid-tier publicly traded miners that maintain significant BTC reserves, a strategy that can serve as both a store of value and a hedge against fiat currency depreciation. Industry Context and Implications Cango’s disclosure comes amid a period of heightened attention on public mining companies’ production costs and treasury strategies. Following the April 2024 halving, which reduced block rewards by 50%, miners have faced tighter margins. Companies with lower cost bases and efficient fleets have been better positioned to weather the reduced revenue environment. Cango’s cost of $68,061 per coin is competitive compared to many peers, suggesting its operational setup is well-optimized for the post-halving landscape. For investors, the monthly production report provides a transparent window into the company’s operational health. The ability to mine profitably while building a sizable Bitcoin reserve signals financial discipline and long-term conviction in the asset. Conclusion Cango’s April performance reinforces its position as a disciplined operator in the public Bitcoin mining space. With 230 BTC mined at a competitive cost and a treasury exceeding 1,000 Bitcoin, the company continues to execute a strategy focused on operational efficiency and long-term value accumulation. As the industry adapts to post-halving economics, such metrics will remain critical for evaluating miner performance. FAQs Q1: What is Cango’s average cost to mine one Bitcoin? For April 2025, Cango reported an average mining cost of $68,061 per Bitcoin, covering electricity, hosting, and operational expenses. Q2: How much Bitcoin does Cango currently hold? As of the end of April, Cango held 1,057.46 Bitcoin on its balance sheet, accumulated primarily through its own mining operations. Q3: Why is Cango’s mining cost important to investors? The cost per Bitcoin is a key measure of operational efficiency and profitability. A lower cost relative to Bitcoin’s market price indicates healthier margins and better resilience during market downturns. This post Cango Mined 230 BTC in April, Treasury Reaches 1,057 Bitcoin first appeared on BitcoinWorld .

8 May 2026, 09:42

Arbitrum greenlights $71 million ETH release after hack

🚨 Arbitrum approves $71 million in ETH to be released after the hack. More than 90% of voters support returning the funds to affected users in $ETH. 🧑‍⚖️ Critical data: The release still faces a major legal hurdle in a Manhattan court. Continue Reading: Arbitrum greenlights $71 million ETH release after hack The post Arbitrum greenlights $71 million ETH release after hack appeared first on COINTURK NEWS .

8 May 2026, 09:32

ASIC pushes brokers to boost cyber defenses against frontier AI risks

The Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) warns financial firms and market participants to step up cybersecurity protections as artificial intelligence continues to amplify cyber threats globally. It maintained that, while cyber threats have always been a concern, sophisticated AI tools like Claude Mythos could dramatically accelerate the discovery and exploitation of vulnerabilities. In an open letter, the regulator advised companies to secure their systems against AI-accelerated risks now rather than depend on future AI tools. Primarily, it advocated a technology-neutral, principles-driven approach to the urgently needed cyber upgrades. What does the ASIC expect from licensees across the country? Frontier AI has pushed cyber risk into a “new era,” cautioned ASIC Commissioner Simone Constant. She noted that, despite the potential perks of advanced AI models, they can still exploit vulnerabilities much faster than most anticipate. That means isolated gaps can now cause a total system collapse, with average attackers gaining access to high-level hacking techniques. This communication follows evidence from Connective that brokers are integrating AI tools without the necessary defensive frameworks. Connective chief executive Glenn Lees contended that the broker industry is currently buzzing with AI excitement but lacks the structure needed for secure, steady deployment. Nonetheless, he urged brokers to build a solid foundation of strategy, systems, and governance, asserting that this is probably the only way to make AI adoption work. ASIC’s open letter also asked licensees to address their security gaps now, rather than waiting to see how AI threats evolve. Constant explained that a ready-to-go response plan is essential, since the basic rules of cyber safety don’t change just because the technology does. She added that top-level management must take ownership, ensuring that rigorous testing and early remediation happen well before a threat becomes a crisis. She further commented, “The clock is at a minute to midnight – if you aren’t on top of your cyber resilience already, the time to act and prepare is right now.” Additionally, aside from the ASIC, the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) cautioned banks that their governance and control measures for artificial intelligence are lagging behind the rapid expansion of AI tools . APRA member Therese McCarthy Hockey stated: “The AI revolution presents tremendous opportunities for banks, insurers, and superannuation trustees to deliver improved efficiency and enhanced customer services. But we cannot be blind to the risks of such powerful technology.” ASIC took action against FIIG Securities The ASIC recently moved against Australian fixed-income specialist FIIG Securities Limited (FIIG) for failing to implement proper cyber safeguards for its massive client base for years. Consequently, the firm was directed to pay pecuniary penalties totaling $2.5 million and about $500,000 towards ASIC’s costs. Reportedly, FIIG’s security weaknesses played a role in the scale of a 2023 cyber breach that exposed confidential data, including tax file numbers, bank account details, and identification documents. About 18,000 clients received notice that their sensitive personal details may have been leaked. At the time, the FIIG even conceded that its cybersecurity arrangements were inadequate under its Australian Financial Services (AFS) license requirements and that better safeguards may have reduced the impact of the breach. By their own admission, the company also failed to follow its own policies designed to prevent exactly this kind of data leak. The Federal Court also mandated an independent audit to bring its cyber resilience up to a professional standard. Following the case’s outcome, ASIC Deputy Chair Sarah Court even commented, saying, “ASIC expects financial services licensees to be on the front foot every day to protect their clients. FIIG wasn’t – and they put thousands of clients at risk. In this case, the consequences far exceeded what it would have cost FIIG to implement adequate controls in the first place.” Still letting the bank keep the best part? Watch our free video on being your own bank .