Aerodrome Finance, a leading decentralized exchange on Coinbase’s Base network with $400 million in total value locked, was targeted in a front-end attack late Friday, prompting urgent warnings for users to avoid its primary domains.

The incident appears to be a DNS hijacking of Aerodrome’s centralized domains, which allowed attackers to reroute users to lookalike phishing sites designed to trick them into signing malicious wallet transactions to separate them from their funds. Users are advised to instead rely on Aerodrome’s decentralized domains. Aerodrome has asked My.box, the domain provider, to contact them over a potential exploit of their systems.

These attacks do not compromise the underlying smart contracts, which manage user funds and protocol logic on-chain. At the time of writing, it’s unconfirmed whether the attack has led to any losses or how many users have been affected. Liquidity pools and protocol treasuries remain intact, according to Aerodrome.

Aerodrome’s team has been posting real-time updates on X, urging users not to access the compromised domains, aerodrome.finance and aerodrome.box, and instead use decentralized ENS mirrors like aero.drome.eth.limo. To reduce risk, the team recommends revoking recent token approvals using tools like Revoke.cash and avoiding signing any transactions from unverified domains.

New attack

Aerodrome has experienced similar front-end attacks before, including two in late 2023 that resulted in approximately $300,000 in user losses.

This latest attack comes just days after Aerodrome announced a merger with Velodrome, consolidating liquidity across Base and Optimism under the new “Aero” ecosystem. Despite the disruption, the AERO token price remained stable at around $0.67, up 2% over the last 24 hours.

The investigation is ongoing.

Story Continues

Seeing someone wear wide-leg trousers with a specific type of shirt and then buying said shirt is all well and good in that one outfit context, but unless we actually integrate the item into other outfits, it’ll always just be a one-hit wonder.

Why I ever did this is so beyond me. There are certain items in my wardrobe that haven’t ever been right for me. How do I know that? Because I bought them that way. I’ve made this mistake time and time again – either I’ll try something on or order it online, and it won’t be quite how I hope or expect it to be, but I’ll keep it anyway because I like the idea of it so much. Or I try to convince myself I can somehow make it work, or it’ll look different when my hair and make-up are done.

Trying to get yourself to wear things you don’t love or aren’t quite right is always going to keep you wanting to buy more. While we might get the dopamine hit at the time of buying, the loop doesn’t ever really close.

Ever go out looking for something specific, like a black jumper or a red cardigan or a pair of white jeans, and despite not being able to find what you want, you’re so hungry to start wearing that item that you get something that isn’t quite right and tell yourself it’ll do? I had a few items that fell into this category.

I recognised this mistake both in my wardrobe during the Project, and in memories of items I’d owned before. This was proof of the urgency and pace that existed in my buying habits, as though once I’d got the idea of an outfit or an item in my head, I had to get it even if it wasn’t perfect.

Advertisement

Isn’t the whole point of neutrals that they’re, well, neutral? They go with everything? Yeah, no. I learned the hard way that just because you have a wardrobe full of neutrals does not mean you have a wardrobe full of outfits. Who knew that not all blacks are the same. Not all whites are the same. And don’t even get me started on creams, stones and beiges.

Having an event or occasion to attend is one of the most common reasons why we buy clothes. When we want to look nice, we invoke the shortcut of buying something we’re excited to wear. The problem with this is we’re then left with pieces we bought for that one specific context, in a similar way to when we buy to replicate a specific outfit. That item is then siloed in our minds, and we’re less likely to want to reach for it for the next event.

Plus, we’ve built up that behavioural loop of an event or occasion being a trigger to buy.

This is an edited extract from The Wardrobe Project: A year of buying less and liking yourself more by Emma Edwards (Wiley, $34.95), available 26 November at all leading retailers.

Advertisement

Today’s guest column is by Joseph Glatt, co-chair of the global Private Credit Group at Paul, Weiss.

The business of sports has evolved into one of the most sophisticated capital markets in the world. Franchises that once relied on wealthy patrons now operate as global enterprises with complex balance sheets, diversified revenue streams and brand portfolios that span continents. Behind the scenes, a quiet transformation is taking place. Private credit has become the financing engine powering the next phase of the industry’s growth.

For decades, the financial architecture of sports was narrow. Teams depended on a mix of owner equity, bank loans and broadcast advances. That model worked when sports was seasonal, media rights were centralized, and stadiums were used a few dozen times a year.

Today the business is more complicated. Digital engagement has replaced ticket sales as the primary growth driver, broadcast rights are fragmented across platforms, and venues have become year-round entertainment ecosystems. Private credit brings structure, speed and sophistication to a business that is increasingly complex and ever-evolving.

The appeal is obvious. Sports franchises have matured from passion assets into performance assets. Media rights, sponsorships, premium seating, licensing and real estate all provide recurring cash flows—a profile that looks less like entertainment and more like infrastructure. For credit investors searching for yield with tangible downside protection, it’s a natural fit.

What distinguishes the current wave of sports lending is its focus on assets. Lenders are financing discrete pieces of the ecosystem rather than entire teams—broadcast receivables, naming rights, arena redevelopment or ancillary real estate. A stadium backed by long-term contracts and naming agreements can support senior debt that behaves much like project finance. The economics are stable, the security is visible, and the exposure is detached from game outcomes. It’s a structural rather than sentimental approach to sports finance.

This shift has attracted institutional capital on a scale that would have been unthinkable a few years ago. Pension funds, insurers and global asset managers now view sports as a legitimate component of their private credit portfolios. The logic is straightforward. The sector offers infrastructure-like cash flows with entertainment-driven growth. European football clubs have refinanced legacy debt with private credit facilities. North American franchises have used direct lending to fund media rights and working-capital needs. Even emerging leagues and women’s sports organizations are turning to private lenders to build facilities and extend reach. The flow of capital is both a cause and a consequence of the sector’s institutionalization.

The sophistication of these transactions reflects a growing recognition that sports carries unique risks. Revenues can fluctuate with team performance or media cycles, and valuations can move with public sentiment.

The best lenders manage this through structure rather than pricing. Deals often include covenants tied to attendance, sponsorship renewals or season-ticket deposits. Some of them link pricing to revenue performance or secure cross-collateralization between real estate and media income. The emphasis is on aligning capital with the rhythm of the underlying business, not imposing a one-size-fits-all template.

The opportunity extends beyond the professional leagues that dominate headlines. Collegiate athletics, youth sports and ancillary service providers are entering a commercial era of their own.

The legalization of name, image and likeness rights has turned college programs into fully commercial enterprises that now require working capital, facilities financing and sponsorship advances. Private lenders can design structures suited to that environment—secured against receivables, ticket income or local partnerships—where traditional financing models fall short.

Youth and amateur sports tell a similar story. The sector generates tens of billions of dollars in annual spending, yet capital formation remains fragmented. Financing of complexes, tournaments and training facilities have become scalable credit opportunities, driven by durable demand rather than speculation.

Real estate has also become inseparable from the business of sports. Stadiums are now anchors of mixed-use developments that include hotels, retail and housing. Teams are monetizing their brands across hospitality, content and data ventures. That convergence between physical and intangible assets creates a dual source of collateral. A stadium’s concrete and steel can be valued like infrastructure, while its media contracts and licensing revenue resemble corporate cash flows. Private credit thrives in precisely this intersection, where structure can integrate both sides of the balance sheet.

This new market is maturing quickly. The challenge now is discipline. Not every team or league deserves institutional credit. The fundamentals must be right: diversified revenue, credible governance and transparent capital structures. The most capable lenders operate more like strategic partners than passive financiers. They help management teams optimize balance sheets, monetize non-core assets and think creatively about liquidity. The value in these relationships lies in partnership, not just pricing.

Looking ahead, the next decade of sports capital will likely involve consolidation and securitization. Portfolios of sports-backed loans may be packaged into rated vehicles, widening access to institutional investors. Cross-border ownership will further globalize the ecosystem, blending European clubs, American franchises and Middle Eastern sovereign funds into a single capital network. That will require not just financial innovation but also regulatory fluency and geopolitical awareness.

Private credit’s entry into sports is not a passing trend. It marks a structural evolution in how capital supports one of the world’s most powerful industries. Sports is now a platform business, and platform businesses demand flexible, sophisticated financing.

The investors leading this transformation think not in seasons but in cycles. They understand that the scoreboard measures only part of the game. The real competition is for capital efficiency, and those who master it will define the future of sports finance.

Glatt has over 25 years of experience in private practice and in-house at one of the world’s largest alternative asset managers, with a particular focus on complex transactions, strategic product innovation and capital raising for asset management firms and financial institutions.