sukie234-1

So will someone release a meme version of the alliance chain, and publish it domestically to recreate the glory of digital collectibles?

Defi 3.0 Actually in US Stocks... I Enlightened

Cryptocurrency stocks are actually a great opportunity, with abundant liquidity and few investment options, so everyone is very concentrated in their efforts.
As long as you don't encounter companies that issue shares recklessly and don't do anything, I believe they are currently much more cost-effective than counterfeit ones.

Do not leave the venue, although the on-chain liquidity is currently very scarce, with Circle going public and the market capitalization of stablecoins rising, many companies are starting to accumulate coins and play the flywheel. In the future, the threshold for the public to enter the blockchain will be lower, assets will be on-chain, and when the Fed lowers interest rates and retail investors' risk appetite increases, I believe there will be more opportunities on-chain. I am optimistic about $ETH, $SOL, and other public chains with ample funds and strong communities.

Summarize the script of Pumpfun's coin issuance
Narrative chain: SOL ETF approved → SOL rises → meme market restarts → Pumpfun coin issuance → Great retreat

Logic and clues: The rumor of Pumpfun's coin issuance has been around for a long time. Recently, there have been rumors of major exchanges changing Pump ticker and financing. Although Pump itself is still half-hiding, it is obvious that its ambition to issue coins can no longer be hidden.

Rumor has it that Pump is seeking $4 billion FDV to raise $1 billion.

Reasoning: If the rumor is true, then the purpose of issuing coins is to exit for itself and investors, with investors accounting for 25%, the team accounting for 10%, and airdrops accounting for 10%, plus liquidity and market making and other messy marketing expenses of 10%. Assuming that 10% of these tokens will seek to be realized at the opening, then the opening market needs to bear the selling pressure of $400M–$470M.

If the initial circulation is 15% (10% is not enough for the project party and VC to cash out, and 20% will cause dissatisfaction in the community, so let's count it as 15%), then in the case of a VC round of 4 billion FDV, the amount of funds needed to pull the price to 8 billion (market value ranking is roughly equivalent to Sui, Arbitrum, Hyperliquid) is about 500M-700M. So under the selling pressure + pulling the price to 8 billion US dollars, it takes about 1B US dollars.

So what is the current market purchasing power?

Binance accounts for about 59% of the total stablecoins in the entire crypto cex market, 30B USD, about 10%-15% is in "hot wallet status", hot money that can be opened at any time, about $3B-$4B, other exchanges 2B, and the capacity of dex to handle about 0.5B, a total of $5.8B-$9B, of which the liquidity of mainstream coins accounts for 70%-80%, so the entire market is left for other altcoins to buy about 1-2B.
Source: https://t.co/EmV1DIRZT4

That is to say, if Pumpfun issues a coin and the VC round just breaks even, Pumpfun can occupy half of the altcoin buying in the entire market. Pumpfun currently has more than 1 million active wallets, about 300,000-400,000 real active users, and about 50,000-70,000 daily active users. Considering the growth after the coin issuance, including the existing users of cex, we can count it as 500,000 users. Reference data: https://t.co/SUqNIAjEFE

According to 4 billion fdv, each user needs to pay $800 to buy pump tokens, and 8 billion fdv, it is $1,600.But how much is the asset of a single user on Solana? According to statistics, the median consumption power of Solana active users is about $100-$300/person, and the top 10% of users have a single-coin transaction capacity of more than $1,000. According to previous statistics by @Adam_Tehc, only the top 3% of players have earned more than $1,000.

Source: https://t.co/4QAwxKKRGy
https://t.co/SB2XjoSoyQ

If Pump goes directly to Binance, here are two data. One is based on Binance alpha. The latest published average transaction volume of alpha users is $52,000. Then it is estimated that the user single-coin transaction volume on Binance spot+alpha is about $5K-$10K/day.
The other is based on Binance's global registration volume, which is about 270M, MAU is 100M, and the daily transaction volume is 15-30B, so the transaction volume per user is $300.

Let's calculate how much money Pumpfun currently has. According to the Defilama dashboard, the historical income is 3.3M SOL, about 747M, accounting for 0.5% of the total supply of Solana and 0.6% of the circulation. There are still 150M left on the chain, that is, 650M has been cashed out, plus 1B given by VC (assuming half of it has been received), the disposable cash on hand is about 1B.

If we follow the BNB model, if 20% of the income is used to buy back and pull the market, the daily trading volume of DEX is about 770KSOL (≈$120M USD/day)
Annual transaction fees/income: about 2.85M – 2.95M SOL/year (≈$450M–$460M USD/year)
Converted to US dollars (at the current price of about $155/SOL): annual income ≈ $450M.
Take 20% for buyback: ≈ 90M annual buyback volume
Source: https://t.co/SUqNIAjEFE

Not bad, right? But first of all, consider whether Pumpfun can maintain its leading position and continue to print money for a long time.

In addition, if Pumpfun raises VC rounds according to 4 billion FDV, and the project party, VC and airdrop party do not ship, and still use the funds in hand to pull the market, and the liquidity in the market is confident and willing to take it, then will it exceed Solana's current market value ($87B)?

As a king-level project, Pump's coin issuance really reminds me of the fear of being dominated by fomo when @BoredApeYC issued Monkey Land.

Summarize the Great Retreat Script of Pumpfun

Narrative Chain: SOL ETF Approval → SOL Rises → Meme Market Reboots → https://t.co/2KUONsaGMB Token Launch → Great Retreat

Logic and Clues:
Although the rumor of Pumpfun's token launch has been around for a long time, recent rumors from major exchanges about changing the Pump ticker and financing suggest that while Pump is still being coy, the ambition to launch a token can no longer be hidden.

Rumor 1: Pump is seeking $4 billion FDV to raise $1 billion.

Inference: If the rumor is true, then the purpose of launching the token is to allow both itself and investors to exit. Investors hold 25%, the team holds 10%, airdrops account for 10%, plus liquidity, market making, and other miscellaneous marketing expenses account for 10%. Assuming 10% of these tokens will seek to liquidate at the opening, then the sell pressure the market needs to absorb at launch is $400M–$470M.

Assuming everyone has diamond hands, with an initial circulation of 15% (10% is not enough for the project and VC to cash out, 20% would cause community dissatisfaction, so let's assume 15%), under the circumstance of $4 billion FDV in the VC round, to pump it to $8 billion (market cap ranking roughly equivalent to Sui and Arbitrum, Hyperliquid) requires approximately $500M – $700M in funds.

So to bear the sell pressure + pump it to $8 billion, it needs approximately close to $1B.

So how is the current market purchasing power?

Binance accounts for about 59% of the total stablecoin volume in the overall crypto CEX market, $30B, with about 10%–15% being in a 'hot wallet state', meaning hot money that can be deployed at any time, roughly around $3B–$4B, other exchanges around $2B, with a DEX absorption capacity of about $0.5B, totaling $5.8B–$9B, of which liquidity for mainstream coins accounts for 70%-80%, so the entire market leaves about $1B–$2B for other altcoin buying.
Source: https://t.co/UABF5hHDYw

In other words, if Pumpfun launches a token and the VC round just breaks even, Pumpfun could capture half of the market for altcoin purchases.

Pumpfun currently has over 1 million active wallets, with about 300,000–400,000 real active users, daily active users around 50,000–70,000. Considering growth after the token launch, including existing users on CEX, we can estimate around 500,000 users.
Reference Data: https://t.co/SUqNIAjEFE

According to $4 billion FDV, each user needs to spend $800 to purchase Pump tokens, and for $8 billion FDV, it would be $1600.

But how much assets does a single user on Solana have? According to statistics, the median spending capacity of active users on Solana is around $100–$300 per person, with the top 10% of users having a single coin trading capability exceeding $1,000, and according to a previous article by @Foresight_News, only the top 3% of players earned over $1,000.
Source: https://t.co/Cpk6NTIbPy
https://t.co/SB2XjoSoyQ

If Pump goes directly to Binance, there are two data points. One is based on Binance Alpha, the latest reported average trading volume of Alpha users is $52,000, so the estimated trading volume per user on Binance Spot + Alpha is around $5K–$10K per day. The other is based on Binance's global registration volume, which is about 270M, with MAU at 100M, and daily trading volume of $15B–$30B, so the trading volume per user is around $300.

Let's also calculate how much money Pumpfun currently has. According to the Defilama dashboard, historical revenue is 3.3M SOL, roughly around $747M, accounting for 0.5% of the total supply of Solana, 0.6% of the circulating supply, with another 150M remaining on-chain, meaning $650M has already been cashed out. So why launch a token? Firstly, although growth is slowing, daily fees are still considerable, and there are many competitors, but they can almost be ignored. Launching a token means the project team can cash out more money.
Source: https://t.co/SUqNIAjEFE

As a top-tier project, Pump launching a token really reminds me of the fear of being dominated by @BoredApeYC monkeys.

Usually when I see those new projects where a lot of KOLs are promoting, I want to short it, because I roughly know their tactics; they are promoting it because they want to sell.

Deposit 2.5 $Mon / 0.0 $aPrMon, Pray and get 150 Superstarlist and other cool ██Redacted██ Partner NFT projects WLs.

You think you are degen enough? start with 0.5 Mon or go all in here : https://raffle.lilchogstars.com/

Note : Raffle will be fully onchain.

If everyone doesn't play in compliant places, they will go to non-compliant places to play. In this cycle, a huge amount of ETF, MicroStrategy, and coin stocks have emerged. For large funds, playing in US stocks is definitely better for exiting than playing in cryptocurrencies. So, we really have to thank Biden and Gary for the emergence of this imitation season.

It feels like I’m selling my friends.

You can get in early now at http://app.wallchain.xyz using invite code 4WV2 to claim Quacks for your last 30 days of activity

What was sent today, and why did my wallet get a 50% discount?

Share the picture of a big shot in the circle of friends.
At present, many people in the ENS community can no longer hold on and have to sell their shares. When ENS was airdropped at the end of 2021, many active users (especially those who had hoarded a large number of .eth domain names in the early stage) received ENS tokens worth hundreds of thousands of US dollars, and even more than one million. There are stories of interns around me who have become wealthy because of ENS.
The myth of getting rich quickly and the early hype are indeed very strong. Users with .eth on Twitter once became a symbol of degen and high-end web3 players, and many KOLs switched to .eth IDs (including me).
It was once so exaggerated that each chain was issuing its own DNS. I also hyped .bnb, .sol, .lens and Unstoppable Domains.
The tears of the times🥲.
Although ENS can be regarded as having practical functions, such as providing wallet mapping and Web3 identity identification, there are actually not many applications that have been put into practice. With the current numerous platforms for labeling chains, it has gradually become only a function of pretending on Twitter, and fewer and fewer people are willing to pay a high premium to buy it.

This is after the .com bubble burst in 2000. Is there anyone still speculating on domain names? Yes, like .ai was very cheap before, because .ai is actually a very small country, no one used it before, but it has been hyped up recently because of AI.

When the .com bubble was at its peak, many related domain name companies and communication service companies IPOed. When the bubble burst, a large number of communication companies went bankrupt, and programmers went bankrupt and lost their jobs and went back to work as lawyers and accountants.

But after the .eth bubble burst, is there anyone still speculating on ens? In fact, there are still some left, although they are also dying, and many big guys have lost hundreds of millions and left.

What about .bnb, .sol and Unstoppable Domains? What is left?

I still think that the .com bubble and ens bubble are very valuable economics and communication courses for me.

The .com model has inherent flaws: a large number of companies have the same business plan in the same field, which is to monopolize through network effects, but there will only be one winner in each sector, so most companies with the same business plan will fail, but countless .com projects are raising money in IPO every day, leaving a mess.

In short, don't reinvent the wheel.

The cryptocurrency world is full of reinventing the wheel. In the boom period, we should recognize it and embrace it, but when there are a lot of news about getting rich and resigning all in, this is irrational prosperity, and it's time for us to leave.

Seeing you KOLs celebrate the funerals of Cetus and Sui, I can only have one picture

Sui is truly great!

I think KOLs can use various gestures to say that Sui's emergency freeze is amazing. If my money gets stolen, I would definitely be glad I chose decentralization.

The funniest part of this situation is that many projects on Sui were bought at cheap prices by speculators, and then someone came out to call for everyone to hand over their chips.

Because for an ecosystem, losing consensus due to theft is not a big deal; you can spend money to buy KOLs and use 108 different gestures to whitewash, or pull a big bullish line, making the KOLs who previously criticized you come over and grovel.

But if the chips are gone, that would really be the end of the world.

This means that the project side cannot control the market to accumulate chips, pump, dump, or harvest retail investors anymore, and they can’t make money.

They have money and can pump the market, but will they? Letting retail investors make money is more painful than killing them.

I used to be such a self-righteous fool; I would buy a coin and end up in the top 50 holdings, but now I won’t.

It's like in a casino, where the house allows you to make a small profit to satisfy your emotional value, but big profits are not allowed. If you win big in the casino, you might also be hunted down, and one day you could accidentally have a car accident or be assassinated in Macau.

This world has always been like this, and I'm telling you this plainly for the first time, so please don’t be too surprised.

I am in awe of your circle's ability to whitewash KOLs.

Is freezing a very advanced skill?

Putting decentralization aside? Why not talk about it? If you can't even achieve decentralization, why should users trust web2 cloud services over you, a blockchain without even a data center?

Stablecoins are bound to be the most important and far-reaching financial innovation of the next 10 years. The United States has already seen three states—Arizona, New Hampshire, and Texas—pass the 'Bitcoin Reserve Act.' The U.S. Senate GENIUS has passed the stablecoin bill, and in terms of legal compliance, from May 19, 2021, when they were mainly seen as a threat, to May 19, 2025, stablecoins have become an important tool for foreign trade settlements. BTC has become a reserve in some U.S. states, transitioning from being overlooked to entering the mainstream market. Financial inclusion seems like a long journey, but in reality, it has only been 4 years; the world has changed dramatically.

Recently, there has been a renaissance in RWA and payfi. During this quiet time, I have been studying U.S. stablecoin payments and some related laws and regulations.

In 2022, I encountered a small team from Berkeley that was working on a BNPL (buy now pay later) project, which later received investment from Sequoia. After that, like most projects, it seems to have gone silent.

Many people may still not know what BNPL is. Simply put, in the U.S. there is Affirm, and in China, there is Ant Financial's Huabei. This should make it easier to understand.

However, this business model can be quite profitable.
1. They can charge merchants a service fee (merchants are willing to pay fees to improve user conversion rates), which is similar to traditional credit card points, but mainly used in online shopping. For example, when you purchase something, you can choose to pay in installments with Affirm.
2. They charge users a portion of the loan interest (e.g., non-0% APR plans).
3. They provide virtual cards for offline consumption, charging fees equivalent to credit card fees.

Basically, everyone in the U.S. is a slave to installment payments. I often see people buying a pair of Converse canvas shoes and choosing to pay in 12 installments, and it seems like everyone is not concerned about the high interest rates due to poor math skills.

However, in today's renaissance of RWA and payfi, people are accustomed to the existence of U cards, but crypto BNPL still hasn't taken off. I think the main difficulties are as follows:

1. KYC is difficult. Most users who need this are in mainland China, where fiat currency and credit card payments are very mature and convenient. Therefore, the demand for crypto is not so high. Only mainland China has a natural demand due to foreign exchange conversion difficulties, but KYC, you know.

2. There is no way to link on-chain assets to off-chain assets, which simply means that debt collection is difficult.

Traditionally, if you owe money to Ant Huabei, they can freeze your assets through the court and impose high consumption restrictions as punishment. In the U.S., small loan collection can be quite brutal. I’ve heard of collection agencies that call you saying you’ve won the lottery, and then quietly tow your car once you park it somewhere.

Once a user runs away, it’s very difficult for BNPL companies to protect their rights.

3. There is a lack of indicators for credit evaluation. Many crypto millionaires may have substantial crypto assets, but in real life, due to not paying taxes and lacking stable jobs, they might not even be able to borrow $20,000. Thus, how to assess a person's credit rating based on on-chain behavior is also a major challenge.

Small institutions definitely can't handle the above difficulties, but what if this business is done by industry giants like Binance/Coinbase?

First of all, the KYC issues of CEX are certainly resolved, and there are also partnerships with credit card companies for payment, including collaborations with hotels and airlines that I see major exchanges are negotiating.

The remaining key point is how to construct a stable and reliable on-chain/CEX asset credit rating based on users' crypto assets, and then turn this standard into an industry consensus. Currently, it is unclear if any teams in the industry are working on this. If it can really be achieved, it could truly open a financial golden age of P2P innovation and entrepreneurship in the crypto space.