I may have unintentionally become someone who knew about this FDT more than a month in advance At that time, I interviewed an employee who was a former FDT business representative and had a general understanding of the situation of FDUSD. A family opinion, for reference only: -The compliance cost of stablecoins in Hong Kong is extremely high, and the sandbox of stablecoin related regulations was a trial and error in the establishment of the FDA -FDT's business is almost entirely dependent on Binance. And due to the need to align the Binance strategy, in fact, a large amount of subsidies and benefits have been given to Binance users -The reason for resignation is the adjustment of FDT business, shifting from seeking more distribution channels (multiple cex listings, multiple chain deployments) to attempting to maximize asset management in order to seek financing -It hinted to me that if this financing path is not smooth, the FDT business may be difficult to sustain -The circle of stablecoins in Hong Kong is only so large, and these issues should be fairly applied to every stablecoin. The vast majority of stablecoins have corresponding CEX business backgrounds, which are more or less constrained by the parent group's strategy Stablecoins are not as profitable as they seem, this track is more of a large-scale financing play After chatting with him, I immediately cleared my position and used several thousand units of FDUSD as a safe haven for BN. Unexpectedly, a month later, the boomerang hit everyone's forehead