It is a small company. Its market capitalisation is just $65M (or $130 before yesterday’s fall). MSTR for example has a 60 billion market cap, in other words, a thousand times greater. I very much doubt that large companies using Coinbase or Fidelity Custody will encounter these problems. It makes more sense for a company to use a custodian than for an individual. Their assets are held separately by a specialist organisation, which is insured, and these companies do not use the bitcoin P2P.

Biconomy is the only one with the right to come out in the open and talk their part about what really happened and how they want to handle this loss from here out, is this a loss yet we can't say because they only can't withdraw yet.

Is there no way that treasury company can handle their bitcoin without having to move them to a centralised exchange? Trying to figure something out here, what am I missing?

Treasure companies should be holding using Multisig wallets and when it comes to trading it shouldn't take time, the chances of getting stucked like this will be lower.

The company Datavault AI is rather patient. It's been 4 months since the issue happened, but based on the news, they only fill 8-K form which is about important update/announcement. I wonder when will they decide to take more serious legal action.

For that to drop that low, it only means one thing, probably investors believe the funds will no longer be recovered. However since Biconomy is a licensed exchange, then surely they have some assets to pay their users, or maybe it's just a delay and they will still pay, or maybe it's part of a plan to make the price drop so some can buy cheap? We don't know, but the SEC has to investigate this, because if this turns out to be a scam, this would be the first time I've heard of a custodial exchange scam in the last 3 years.

There will always be loads of people who believes that their coins are safer on crypto exchanges, don't even try to confuse them because they can't live with themselves losing the coins and having no one to blame.

There will always be loads of people who believes that self custody is still the best even though many hardware wallets got attacked this year alone and most of these attacks are about data theft and leaks.

This is interesting, there is no 100% safety protocol in crypto space currently and to be honest there should be, it's scary reading online that people lose their coins even though they have never connected the wallet to anything before.

2026 is definitely going to leave behind a big mark in this industry.

It depends on what defines verification. The BTC was never sent to blockchain (according to coindesk). It was simply credit of 1,309 BTC to a Datavault account inside Biconomy off-chain by Scilex. There was no on-chain transaction and therefore the only way to verify would be to attempt a withdrawal. They have been unable to do this since June.

Based on the article that I've read, they agreed selling their shares for Bitcoin but have never actually received the coins, which kinda sounds unbelieve. So Datavault just take their word for it and sent the money to this, I don't know, guarantor/buyer? I can't understand the reasoning behind this. Even if they assume the other party is trusted and can prove their claims with action, trusting that much money to an off-chain settlement sounds risky, especially if the third-party in question is also questionable.

"Just crashed"? What is going on here then? That's since 2018

Well I expected something like this happening with most treasury company using custodians
Especially ones not using reputable.
If I'm not mistaken, it would have been better if a maybe 2 of 3 multisig was used.
If they believe the risk of them holding it themselves is too much.

They have been falling for years as a result of reverse split and issuing of shares without creating value
But this time they went more than 50% in a day after the news.

Biconomy has some questions to answer. What I don't understand is why a company this big takes time to make some investigations. This is my first time of hearing this name, thought it was coinomi at first. A company with millions worth of shares can't even use a reputable custody like coinbase (oops, just heard the parent exchange lost some users data) and some that are long in the game. Datavault is just been silly for trusting this kind of custody. Everything about this Treasury is risk and epic fooling.

Since May this year, almost all the Bitcoin ecosystem are tested, from hardware wallet companies, centralized exchanges, treasury custody. I hope Saylor is checking their treasury, it wouldn't be funny.


This is not a mistake, this is negligence and laziness to keep private keys. What treasury custody are doing isn't a rocket science, they keep private key safe and that is it. Datavault could have done this and this will not be public. They think using internal transaction could give them some privacy, I guess they have one now and it's has blown the company.