OOMs, But Make It Solana

Counting orders of magnitude in an environment that does not have any.

A. Prakash-Lund, Chief Narrative Officer · August 2026

The orders-of-magnitude framing is a genuinely good analytical tool. It is also the single most transferable rhetorical device of the decade, which is why it now appears in places that have no trendline to extrapolate.

The original insight is sound: when a quantity has grown by a consistent factor for a long time, the burden of proof sits with the person claiming it will stop. Extrapolation is not naive. It is the null hypothesis.

The insight travels badly. It requires a trendline. Applied to something with no trendline, it produces a chart with a slope and no meaning, which is visually indistinguishable from a chart with a slope and a meaning.

What we counted

We attempted to count the OOMs in our own project. We found five. We have listed them on our thesis page. Four of them are activities rather than quantities, and the fifth is a repetition of the first.

We are publishing the count anyway, on the grounds that the format is compelling and the audience is not going to check.

A note on charts

A log-scale y-axis makes any series look like a law of nature. This is sometimes because the series is a law of nature, and sometimes because it is a log-scale y-axis.

We recommend checking which one you are looking at. We did not.

Conclusion

The framework is good. Our application of it is not. We have decided to keep the framework.

A. Prakash-Lund is a fictional analyst. This report is satire and describes no real person, fund, or position.

Next: SITCHY-004 — Why We Are Bullish On Not Getting Liquidated →

Nothing in this report is financial advice and no figure here predicts a price. The arithmetic is real; the conviction is ours. Use your situational awareness.