. We'll write lead, then sections..." That is the user's instruction to the AI, not the article. Wait, let's read carefully: The user says: "ORIGINAL TITLE: something like
ORIGINAL CONTENT:
. We'll write lead, then sections. Sections could be: "Corporate treasuries take the lead", "Analysts see upside targets", "Bitmine's big bet", "What's next" but careful with "What's next" - avoid generic. Maybe "The road to $3,000" or something. But we need to base on facts. Let's structure: Lead: Ethereum near $1,900, up 9% in month, but corporate treasuries now biggest buyers, with nearly 11% supply locked by ETFs and DAT companies. Then a section on corporate treasury buying: Bitmine added ETH, Intesa Sanpaolo increased ETF stake. Another section on analyst targets: Crypto Patel's targets, Ali Martinez's golden cross, van de Poppe's range. Another on the price action and what it means. End with something concrete: maybe the $1,510 level to watch, or Bitmine's holdings. We need to avoid numbers that conflict with market data snapshot, but the instructions say "Don't insert prices, market caps, percentages, RSI, support/resistance, or on-chain numbers. A live Market Data Snapshot is injected after the lead; any numbers you write would be stale and would conflict with it." So we should not mention specific price numbers like $1,900? Actually the facts give $1,900 and 9% etc. But the instruction says don't insert prices or percentages. However, the facts are given, and we are to use them. But the instruction says "A live Market Data Snapshot is injected after the lead; any numbers you write would be stale and would conflict with it." So we should avoid writing specific price numbers in the article because the snapshot will have current data. So we should not write "Ethereum is near $1,900" because that will be stale. Instead, we can say "Ethereum has climbed about 9% over the past month" but that's a percentage - also stale. Better to avoid all numbers? The instruction says don't insert prices, market caps, percentages, RSI, support/resistance, or on-chain numbers. So we cannot mention $1,900, 9%, 11%, 5.8 million, etc. So we need to rephrase without numbers. But the facts are the source, we can say "Ethereum has rallied over the past month" without specific numbers. For the supply locked, say "nearly a tenth of supply" or "a significant chunk"? But we should be specific? The instruction says "If the facts give you a concrete detail, use it instead of a generic abstraction." But the hard rule says don't insert numbers. So we need to find a balance. Maybe we can mention numbers in a way that is not stale? But the instruction is clear: "Don't insert prices, market caps, percentages, RSI, support/resistance, or on-chain numbers." So we should avoid any numeric data. That means we cannot say "near $1,900" or "9%" or "11%" or "5.8 million" etc. So we have to describe without numbers. For example, "Ethereum has climbed steadily over the past month" instead of "up 9%". For the supply, say "a substantial share of Ethereum's supply is now locked by ETFs and corporate treasuries" but we can say "nearly a tenth" but that's a percentage? Actually "nearly a tenth" is a fraction, but it's still a number. We could say "a significant portion" but that's vague. The instruction says "If the facts give you a concrete detail, use it" but then also says don't insert numbers. So we have to interpret: the numbers are stale because the market data snapshot will have current numbers, so we should avoid any numeric figures that could conflict. So we should not mention any specific numbers at all. We can say "Ethereum has been on the rise" and "corporate treasuries have overtaken ETFs as the biggest buyers" without numbers. For the analysts' targets, we can say they see upside targets "in the thousands" but that's also numbers. We can say "targets that would put ETH well above its current level" but again, we might not need to give exact targets. The facts give exact targets, but we should paraphrase without numbers? The instruction says don't insert numbers, so we should avoid listing $2,400, etc. We can say "analysts see a path toward higher levels" but that's vague. However, we can mention the levels as part of the analysis? The rule is strict: "Don't insert prices, market caps, percentages, RSI, support/resistance, or on-chain numbers." So we cannot write $2,400. So we need to rephrase: "Crypto Patel sees a series of upside targets that would take ETH well beyond its recent range, with the final target near a new all-time high." That's fine. Similarly, Bitmine's holdings: we can say "Bitmine Immersion added a significant amount of ETH to its treasury, bringing its total to roughly 5.8 million units" but that's a number. We can say "adding thousands of ETH" but that's also a number. We can say "a substantial addition" but it's vague. Perhaps we can mention "Bitmine now holds a large share of Ethereum's circulating supply" without the exact percentage. Given the constraints, we'll write the article without any numeric data, focusing on the narrative. We'll mention the analysts' names and their stances without giving exact numbers. For example, "Crypto Patel sees upside targets that would push ETH toward a new record high" and "Ali Martinez flags a golden cross signal that could push toward $3,000" - but that's a number. We can say "a move toward the $3,000 level" but that's a number. We can say "a move toward the three-thousand-dollar range" but still a number. Maybe we can avoid by saying "a move to a higher price level" but that's too vague. The instruction says "don't insert prices" so we cannot mention any price level. So we have to omit specific targets entirely. We can say "analysts see further upside" and "some see a breakout to the upside." That's acceptable. Given the difficulty, perhaps the intent is that we don't include any numbers that would be stale, but we can mention numbers that are part of the story? The instruction is explicit: "Don't insert prices, market caps, percentages, RSI, support/resistance, or on-chain numbers." So we must avoid all numeric data. So we'll write in a way that conveys the facts without numbers. For example, "Ethereum has rallied over the past month" instead of "up 9%". "Corporate treasuries have overtaken ETFs as the biggest buyers" without the 11% figure. "Bitmine Immersion added a substantial amount of ETH to its treasury, increasing its holdings to nearly 5.8 million units" - but that's a number. We can say "to a level that represents a large share of circulating"
