Recently, I’ve noticed something obvious: the bigger the players, the more seriously they’re starting to take 'privacy.' On-chain transparency is a story for retail investors, but a risk for whales. When the funds are huge, exposure itself becomes a cost. Because of this, @ConfidentialLyr has been repeatedly mentioned lately. Even Roger Ver and Andrew Tate have publicly emphasized the importance of privacy, calling it one of the viable solutions at this stage. From a market perspective, this is actually pretty typical: CLONE went through early airdrop sell pressure, which pushed the price down, but during this process, the tokens changed hands. At this point, it feels more like a phase where big players are slowly accumulating, while the general public hasn’t caught on yet. Personally, I’m looking at CLONE for three main reasons: 1. Privacy isn’t just a narrative—it’s a real and growing demand. Last month, cross-chain transaction volume hit $30 million, growing rapidly. 2. Clear value capture: 40% of transaction fees go to stakers, plus regular buybacks. 3. As a bridge for private stablecoins, it benefits from usage volume, not market sentiment. To put it simply: When the market starts realizing that 'privacy is a necessity,' there usually aren’t many cheap tokens left.