- Position shrinks: Lookonchain’s tracked Ethereum long, labeled machibigbrother.eth, fell from 5,264 ETH in mid-July to 2,500 ETH by Aug. 14.
- Liquidation gap narrows: On Aug. 14, the ETH midpoint sat just 1.21% above the account’s reported liquidation price.
- Attribution has limits: On-chain explorers support the address link, but they do not confirm who controls the account.
A leveraged Ethereum position linked to the public address tracked as Machi Big Brother has been substantially reduced over the past month, alongside three reported sales of Bored Ape NFTs at significant losses. By Aug. 14, the account’s long exposure had been cut by more than half, yet the market price remained close to the level at which the position would be liquidated.
What Happened
Hyperliquid’s public Info API recorded the address holding a 2,500 ETH long at 3:51:43 p.m. UTC on Aug. 14. The position was displayed with 25x leverage and a liquidation price of $1,859.15. Fourteen seconds later, the venue’s ETH midpoint was $1,881.65, leaving a gap of $22.50 between market price and the liquidation level.
Compared with the 5,264 ETH long that Lookonchain reported on July 14, the position was 52.51% smaller. Its liquidation price had also climbed by $102.39, from $1,756.76. Between those two points, the account went through several reported events. Lookonchain said Bored Ape #251 sold at a 6.99 ETH loss on July 14. On July 31, Hyperliquid fill data showed three close-long groups at 1:47:16, 2:04:59 and 2:06:57 p.m. UTC, which closed 700 ETH, 560 ETH and 448 ETH, or 1,708 ETH in total, with about $96,301 in aggregate negative closed PnL.
Further sales followed. An Aug. 5 Lookonchain post showed Bored Ape #5670 selling for 9 ETH after a displayed purchase of 84.99 ETH, a loss of 75.99 ETH, or 89.4% in ETH terms. On Aug. 13, Lookonchain reported Bored Ape #5715 selling for 8.3 ETH after a 34.17 ETH purchase, a difference of 25.87 ETH. By that snapshot, the long stood at 2,800 ETH with a liquidation price of $1,863.08.
Etherscan labels the address as machibigbrother.eth, and HypurrScan displays an account page for the same hexadecimal address. These pages support the public attribution used by Lookonchain. However, neither explorer establishes who personally controls the account at each point in time, and the wider finances of Jeffrey Huang fall outside what the on-chain data can show.
Why It Matters
For traders, the episode illustrates how quickly a leveraged position’s risk profile can change. The liquidation price did not move in a straight line. It rose as the long shrank through Aug. 13, then eased by $3.93 in the following 24 hours, even as another 300 ETH came off the position. Position size alone therefore does not explain how close the account sits to its liquidation threshold.
The episode also highlights the difference between converting an asset and reducing risk. Each Bored Ape generated value only when a buyer was found, and the reported sales were recorded at losses relative to the tokens’ earlier purchase prices. Lookonchain described the sales as efforts to support the Ethereum long. However, the public record does not show a complete chain from buyer payment to the Hyperliquid address, so the effect of any individual sale on the position remains unclear.
For the broader market, the case shows how publicly visible on-chain positions can become reference points for other participants. Liquidation levels that are openly displayed may be watched closely, and large forced closures can add pressure to prices during volatile periods.
Market Context
Perpetual futures venues such as Hyperliquid allow traders to hold leveraged exposure to assets like ETH. When collateral value falls relative to the position, the platform can close the position at a predetermined liquidation price. Because many venues record activity on-chain, analysts such as Lookonchain can reconstruct a trader’s position history from public data.
Bored Ape Yacht Club tokens are non-fungible tokens, and their sale prices are typically less liquid than ETH. Turning a high-value NFT into cash or other assets can take time, and sales at a loss can crystallize setbacks rather than offset them. The reported sales in this case occurred during a period when the leveraged ETH position was being reduced, which suggests a connection, but the available data does not establish a direct causal link.
The account’s history also includes a reported set of liquidations on July 31. Lookonchain’s figure of a $1,843.40 liquidation price for that period relies on the tracker’s post and cannot be independently verified from the same data set as the Hyperliquid fill records.
What to Watch Next
Readers should follow whether the account’s ETH long continues to shrink and how the liquidation price responds to further market moves. Because the 1.21% gap was measured at a single timestamp, prices, fills and account equity can change quickly, and the position may already have shifted.
Further Lookonchain posts and Hyperliquid API data will be the main sources of updates. It will also be worth watching whether additional NFT sales are reported and whether those transactions can be linked to the trading account. Any clear evidence connecting specific individuals to the address would be a separate development that the current on-chain data does not provide.
Source: original report