Recently, many people said Uni would go to zero. I wrote an article about Uni, and someone criticized me, saying I was promoting a worthless coin.
When I encounter haters or those who don't think critically and argue without logic, I simply ignore them.
I want to clarify that I do not advise anyone to buy Uni, as I deeply understand that recommending people to buy coins often leads to bad outcomes.
If it rises, it's a joyous occasion, but it may only provide temporary satisfaction for vanity. If it falls, then it could lead to a loss of reputation.
Coincidentally, I dislike vanity; I love money instead. Therefore, I would never engage in such behavior.
I personally hold Uni; if it goes to zero, I can bear it. I am willing to pay for my own understanding. I don't know if those reading my article can handle it, so don't buy just because of what I say.
I can take responsibility for my actions; you must also be responsible for your own finances. I am merely providing logic. Even if what I say is completely correct, the price might not necessarily rise.
Now I will start my analysis.
Many people say that Uni does not empower; it is merely a governance token, and thus has no value.
However, the foundation has decided to proportionally distribute any protocol fees to UNI token holders who have staked and delegated their voting rights. The profit-sharing model will soon be seen in major projects.
Some people say that the governance rights of Uni are tightly controlled by a16z. They initially wanted to deploy on BNB but faced opposition, with even CZ publicly criticizing a16z.
Many people believe that Uniswap should be deployed on BSC. Wouldn't that create another channel? This would generate incremental business for Uni.
What Uni currently needs is not just incremental growth; it has already branched out on the largest public chain. What it needs is stability and safety, ensuring no unexpected issues arise. Having an additional BSC does not qualitatively help its business scale.
So let's assume that Uni is really deployed on BSC. If one day BSC does something to mess with Uni, or if there's another black swan event.
BSC also operates a DEX, making it a direct competitor.
If one day BSC deliberately causes issues with the Uniswap pools or halts the use of Uni, locking a large amount of coins, wouldn't that negatively impact Uni?
The original sin of BSC is its centralization; they can directly stop the chain.
A16z, who holds governance rights, possesses several hundred million dollars worth of Uni. They prefer stable growth for Uni rather than risking it for minor increments; they don't need another BSC to boost their transaction volume. Is it true that users of BSC don’t also use Ethereum? Do big holders refuse to use Ethereum just to save on gas fees? That question doesn’t exist.
Therefore, it was the right choice for Uni not to deploy a DEX on BSC. Institutions are indeed powerful; they see things that ordinary people cannot.
Some people say that Uni does not provide dividends or empowerment, etc. They consider it worthless, hence they believe Uni has no future and cannot compete with other CEXs. If you have such thoughts, I suggest you stay away from Uni.
The reason Uni does not empower is its smartest aspect, as by doing so, Uni will always maintain the expectation of empowerment. Most importantly, Uni will never be classified as a security by the SEC, thus avoiding being stifled or regulated.
Being regulated or stifled would negate the meaning of Uni as a decentralized exchange. So, Uni's approach can be seen as enduring hardship, and it shares all transaction fees with LP. Which DEX can do that? Which CEX can achieve it? Uni proves its innocence by turning itself into air, but it became a criticized flaw. In fact, this was something it had to do.
My prediction for Uni's future is that it should surpass the market value of centralized exchanges. For example, in the next cycle, if the entire Web3 world reaches a valuation of $40 trillion, then Uni occupying 5% of that seems reasonable, equating to $200 billion. But what is Uni's market value today? Just $5.3 billion.
Uni does not have the substantial costs associated with CEX exchanges; it is nearly costless. Moreover, when issues frequently occur on exchanges, Uni is bound to capture a stable share of the trading market because people are gradually beginning to trust machines over humans.
Putting coins on CEX might not be safe, but placing them on Uni to do LP allows you to withdraw anytime, and it will never be misappropriated. Plus, you can earn transaction fees. If it were you, which would you choose? Anyone with significant funds would have this thought.
The above is my logic. If you have your own views, feel free to comment.
