On February 7, 2026, at 8:00 AM UTC+8, trader Eugene Ng Ah Sio publicly stated that a BTC OG insider whale he identified, Garrett Jin, has reportedly liquidated his Bitcoin holdings and is now in a wait-and-see mode. This off-market news quickly spread throughout the market. During the same period, the Coinbase Bitcoin premium index has remained negative for 23 consecutive days, briefly turning positive only on January 6 (0.011%) and January 15 (0.0023%) this year, highlighting a clear lack of buying power in the U.S. Additionally, ETH once dipped below 2000 USDT and then surged 5.41% within 24 hours, with the simultaneous occurrence of whale liquidation, negative spot premiums, and significant fluctuations in mainstream assets. The liquidity and emotional pressure from both sides have made the question of "who is picking up Bitcoin" particularly sharp.
Rumors of OG Whale Liquidation Ignite Chill
● The starting point of the public narrative is Eugene Ng Ah Sio's statement on social media on February 7, identifying Garrett Jin as a deeply involved BTC OG whale with a substantial position, claiming he has recently completed large-scale liquidation or even full liquidation. Given Eugene's long-standing activity in the trading circle, this "named" statement was quickly amplified within the community, becoming one of the core topics of discussion in the market that day.
● Eugene further revealed that Garrett Jin has chosen to liquidate his Bitcoin positions and adopt a wait-and-see stance, emphasizing that he will only participate in "trading opportunities with clear risk-reward ratios" in the future. This statement casts a strong shadow on the emotional level: if an OG regarded as having both experience and informational advantages believes that the current situation only suits waiting for highly cost-effective opportunities, ordinary traders continuing to heavily bet in the current range face amplified uncertainty and volatility risks.
● It is crucial to emphasize that this information comes from off-market verbal accounts and social media statements, rather than directly verifiable on-chain data. There is currently a lack of publicly verifiable on-chain evidence to support the specifics of Garrett Jin's position size or whether he has "100% liquidated." With this as the tone of the article, the discussion will focus on market sentiment and structural changes based on existing facts, avoiding exaggeration and not speculating on any individual's asset status beyond the information sources.
Coinbase Negative Premium Extends Shadow
● According to briefing data, the Coinbase Bitcoin premium index has maintained a negative premium for 23 consecutive days, with the latest reading at approximately -0.0878% (single source). This means that at the same time, Coinbase's pricing is lower compared to other major platforms, reflecting the relative weakness of domestic buying power in the U.S. For nearly a natural month, this "discount" status has not been effectively alleviated, providing intuitive evidence for the narrative of "U.S. funds not being active."
● Further examining the time structure, since 2026, there have only been two days of brief positive premiums on January 6 (0.011%) and January 15 (0.0023%), and the extent was very limited, contrasting sharply with the subsequent prolonged negative premium. This "fleeting positive premium" compared to the "extended negative premium period" has intensified the market's impression that U.S. institutions and compliant funds "have not actively pursued high allocations," also diminishing some expectations for an incremental U.S. capital relay market.
● From a structural perspective, negative premiums are often interpreted as a reflection of insufficient buying power on the U.S. side and increased potential selling pressure: on one hand, there is a lack of sufficient new funds willing to take on higher prices on Coinbase; on the other hand, existing holders may choose to sell at higher prices through other channels or transfer off-market, thereby lowering the relative price on that platform. Against the backdrop of the narrative that whales are choosing to exit, this ongoing discount seems more like a cold answer to the question of "who is picking up"—at least for now, U.S. main funds have not shown an urgent willingness to enter.
Bitcoin Sell-off and Ethereum Plunge Coincide
● On the timeline, the rumors of whale liquidation and the sell-off coincide almost perfectly with a sharp pullback in ETH prices. Briefing data shows that ETH once dipped below 2000 USDT during this phase, causing bullish sentiment to rapidly cool. For a market accustomed to a BTC and ETH dual-driven structure, when rumors of "Bitcoin whale sell-offs" coincide with "Ethereum key levels being breached," even if it is unclear whether there is an inherent connection between the two, it is enough to amplify systemic panic.
● Notably, ETH subsequently recorded a 5.41% rebound within 24 hours, completing a significant V-shaped recovery. This "initial crash followed by a rapid rise" reflects intense competition for funds near critical price levels and reveals the extreme volatility of current market sentiment: panic selling and aggressive bottom-fishing have alternated in a very short time, and any excessive leverage in either direction could be swiftly annihilated in such rapid reversals.
● Based on currently available public information, we can only confirm the temporal correlation between the rumors of whale liquidation and the sharp fluctuations in ETH, but cannot prove a direct causal relationship. There is no evidence that Garrett Jin or other BTC whales' actions necessarily triggered ETH's breach; similarly, there is no data to rule out the dominant role of macro sentiment, derivative liquidations, and other factors. In the absence of cross-verification on-chain and in terms of positions, simply locking the two as a "causal chain" would mislead risk assessment.
On-chain Transfer Rumors and Data Blind Spots
● Alongside discussions of whale liquidation, there is also a claim about a single transfer of 3401 BTC, which some social media accounts have used to support the notion that "large amounts of capital are fleeing." It should be clarified that the research briefing has marked this information as "pending verification": currently, there is no publicly available, authoritative on-chain analysis report directly linking this transfer to Garrett Jin or specific exchange deposit activities, so in a rigorous context, it can only be regarded as an unverified market rumor.
● What truly constrains the narrative's accuracy is a series of missing key details: for instance, did this 3401 BTC transfer entirely or partially go to a centralized exchange? What are the target platforms? Did the related addresses have known associations with whale identities previously? Current public data cannot provide definitive answers to these questions. The ambiguity of wallet address ownership, unclear funding flow paths, and the inability to obtain historical position sizes leave any specific accusations against "a certain individual whale" in a state of incomplete evidence chains.
● In this environment of highly asymmetric information, media and traders need to actively resist the temptation of "conspiracy narratives." On one hand, it is essential to clearly distinguish between "rumors, pending verification, and confirmed" to avoid confusing different levels of information reliability in titles and content; on the other hand, investment decisions should not be based on speculation about a single whale's intentions but should rely more on verifiable data—even if that data is fragmented, it is better than packaging emotional imaginations as "insider information." Maintaining a discount acceptance of uncertain information, rather than emotionally amplifying it, is an important self-protection mechanism at this stage.
Derivative Frenzy and Weakness in Spot Markets Clash
● In contrast to the weakness in the spot market, derivatives and prediction markets are continuing to heat up. Research briefings show that the prediction platform Polymarket recorded 38.4 million visits, highlighting the market's strong interest in various event contracts, price bets, and short-term trading opportunities. High-frequency visits and active trading indicate that funds are more willing to seek short-term gains in this high-leverage, high-stimulation environment rather than making medium- to long-term allocations in the spot market.
● In this pattern, the prolonged negative premium on Coinbase in the U.S. contrasts sharply with the heightened sentiment in the derivatives market: on one side, mainstream compliant platforms are quoting at a discount with weak buying power, while on the other side, event-driven participants are flocking to easily double or even multiply their leverage. The structural signal conveyed is that funds willing to "seriously buy coins and hold for a while" are shrinking, while participants willing to take on higher risks for short-term volatile gains are increasing.
● When whales, regarded as having significant informational and experiential advantages, choose to retreat to a wait-and-see stance, the stage left behind is often occupied by retail and short-term funds, who are more inclined to leverage in the high-volatility derivatives market. The issue is that, against the backdrop of Coinbase's long-term negative premium and slightly weak liquidity, any significant volatility in either direction will be magnified into concentrated liquidations and passive liquidation chains through high-leverage positions, further exacerbating instantaneous volatility. For participants lacking risk control capabilities, betting on derivatives at this time faces the triple cumulative risk of "market turbulence + suboptimal liquidity + whales not picking up."
The Dilemma and Suspense After Whale Exit
When suspected off-market news of whale liquidation coincides with ongoing negative premiums in the U.S. market's on-chain/off-chain data within the same time window, the market is subjected to a dual squeeze of liquidity and confidence: on one hand, the OG, symbolizing "smart money," is rumored to have chosen to liquidate positions and only act when highly cost-effective opportunities arise, undermining ordinary participants' trust in long-term trends; on the other hand, Coinbase's prolonged negative premium also signals at the price level that compliant funds in the U.S. are not in a hurry to take over the baton, making it difficult to quickly fill the "vacuum area" of spot buying.
In such an environment, the difficulty of trading is objectively at a very high level. Eugene's emphasis on "the current market trading difficulty is extremely high, and I will only participate in trading opportunities with clear risk-reward ratios in the future" can be seen as a footnote to the current stage: vague expectations and emotionally driven heavy bets, even if they seem to be on the right track in the short term, may be countered in the midst of severe fluctuations. A more reasonable stance is to reduce directional gambles based on rumors and allocate positions more towards strategies where one can clearly measure win rates and risk-reward ratios.
As for the question of "who is picking up Bitcoin," it remains unresolved for now. To restore this narrative on a factual level, at least three types of signals need to be continuously observed: first, whether the Coinbase premium index shows sustained recovery to determine if U.S. buying power is genuinely warming up; second, whether large on-chain transfers and exchange deposit data can provide clearer address ownership and funding flow; third, whether changes in the leverage structure of the derivatives market are accompanied by signs of whale returns or new institutional entries. Until these clues become clear, the stories about whales and buyers will remain at the level of narrative and speculation.
Join our community to discuss and grow stronger together!
Official Telegram community: https://t.me/aicoincn
AiCoin Chinese Twitter: https://x.com/AiCoinzh
OKX benefits group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=l61eM4owQ
Binance benefits group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=ynr7d1P6Z
免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。
