This idea is exactly the same as the analysis yesterday. If you want to play with those coins with weak fundamentals, you must think from the perspective of the market maker.

**Point 1: The cost of re-accumulating the market**

You are the market maker, and there are two options in front of you. Either invest costs to push the price higher so retail investors can profit, or directly dump this position onto the bagholders and switch to another coin to cut another wave. From a different perspective, if most of the market are long-side bagholders, why would the market maker bother to push the price up? Switching coins and cutting the leeks directly is more efficient.

Some may argue that there are also many short-sellers, and market makers can also harvest the shorts. That's correct, theoretically. But this premise only holds if "everyone is a bagholder."

**Point 2: Do we really need to push the price up?**

People who understand retail psychology know that long-term investors will not leave unless they hit their cost basis. After so much damage, there are definitely some retail investors who entered at good positions, and these people can't be harmed. On the other hand, traders who shorted during the decline only need a slight push to directly consume their liquidity.

The market logic is often more brutal and simpler than imagined.