In recent days, due to the limitations of my research and investment, I have derived three limiting problems that have been bothering me:
1: Why can some people earn a lot of money every day without spending much time on research, while I work hard every day and do not earn much? Where is the gap?
2: Why are there projects that I can only see when others release them? How did that person see them? Where is the gap?
3: Furthermore, when the same information appears before me, why do some people see it as key information, while I sometimes overlook it? Where is the gap?
I am very eager to find answers to these three questions. After communication and reflection, I gradually discovered where the differences between these people and the average ones lie, and how to bridge the gap:
Question 1: Why can some people earn a lot of money every day without spending much time on research, while I work hard every day and do not earn much? Where is the gap?
Answer:
Spending very little time does not mean not spending time; rather, these people invest their time in places that yield the greatest returns.
Their research methods are different, and their research points are also different. They grasp the main contradiction in making money.
The timing of their research is different; they get on board first and verify later.
These people have higher value information channels and networks; information asymmetry is key.
They possess some form of credibility endorsement, such as being group owners, KOLs, or project parties, and come with resources.
These people have high decision-making speed and execution power; they act quickly when they spot an opportunity and stop losses when the trend is wrong.
Question 2: Why are there projects that I can only see when others release them? How did that person see them? Where is the gap?
Answer:
These people are at the source of information before it explodes; they are within or at the edge of key information circles. If you are not in these circles, it is hard to see.
The essential gap is that I am not at these information sources, where first-hand information occurs.
These people have the ability to follow clues, such as looking at big players' wallet addresses, GitHub submission records, etc., which can infer project activities.
The gap lies in the channels and methods of information excavation. Waiting for information and actively seeking information are different; finding the right information is even more important.
Additionally, there are objective data anomalies. For example, if a certain KOL follows a certain project, or there is a surge in trading volume or address numbers, make a data radar and explore the reasons behind the data anomalies.
Question 3: When the same information appears before me, why do some people see it as key information while I sometimes overlook it? Where is the gap?
Answer:
The gap lies in the filtering and weight judgment of information. The weight assigned to information differs.
Experience and mental models differ; this needs practice.
They know what the key links and critical points of project development paths are.
These people are highly sensitive to market sentiment/hotspots.
Key point: How to bridge the gap with these types of people?
1: Upgrade the information layer; the source of information and information circles are more important.
1: Find ways to join more core circles to seek first-hand KOLs, communities, Twitter accounts, etc.
2: Know from whom to obtain information sources, where to obtain information sources? Which communities, KOLs, and friends are the sources of information? Build good relationships with those who can dig up information and interact more with them.
3: Consciously upgrade, actively seek the most first-hand information, including knowing who has information, where to obtain it, and building an information network.
4: Consciously look at data-level things, such as Dune, Nansen, etc., to judge based on objective data anomalies.
2: Establish and iterate an 'evaluation model'.
1: A need to build an evaluation model that not only looks at individual projects but also includes a model for the broader direction.
2: Constantly ask myself: If I only work 8 hours a day, where should I spend my time for the highest output?
3: Establish a scoring sheet to filter out projects that are not worth investing effort in, spending time only on a few that can bring high returns.
3: Train sensitivity to opportunity windows and sector hotspots.
1: Always ask myself what the hottest sector is right now? What could be the next wave of explosion? If I find a hot sector, I need to be alert to any projects related to it.
2: If I find a trend in a certain sector rising, then any related news could be a potential big opportunity.
3: Pay attention to the cyclical nodes of sectors and projects: for example, important financing news, IDOs, end dates of testnets, mainnet launch times, major public chain upgrades, and exchange listings. The periods before and after these nodes are often critical for sectors and projects.
4: Build my 'information-judgment-execution' automated pipeline.
Information: I need to clearly know which circles/channels/who can obtain first-hand or relatively early information.
Judgment: Use my judgment model to evaluate and filter projects while verifying with people in the circle.
Execution: Be decisive; get on board first, research later, then decide to increase or exit the position.
Review: Regularly review to supplement or correct the judgment model.
Summary:
Research duration does not equal effective research; focus on the most critical 20% and abandon the unimportant 80%. Those who make money grasp the 'main contradiction in making money', which is the 'key 20%'.
First-hand information and keen execution are core competencies.
The same information with different weight models will yield different results; it is necessary to build one's own judgment system.
