I just took the time to listen to the entire discussion today.@Yi He I was quite emotional about the space; I had never listened to a space before, and after listening this time, my biggest feeling is that the industry has really changed.
First: The attitude of the leader is really sincere. I have no vested interest with Binance, nor am I any kind of KOL, but I can feel the sincerity in the leader's words. They are genuinely listening to the voices of users, and their openness to suggesting ideas is also quite acceptable.
Moreover, during such a bad market, the leader brought in project parties and lads. I believe these people should also be resistant to this. In this situation, I personally feel that this attitude of facing problems directly shows they are genuinely putting in the effort.
Second: Project parties should indeed be subjected to stricter regulation. I forgot the name of that AI project party; they spoke a lot, almost like reading a script. This kind of perfunctory attitude should be one of the core reasons users are most angry. Just like the last user mentioned, they can accept losing money, which is due to their own lack of skill, but some project parties don't even give you the chance to make money. Listing on Binance is the peak; Teacher Chen Jian also mentioned that some project parties feel they can just relax after being listed on Binance. I believe this attitude towards doing things is what causes users to lose confidence in so-called VC coins.
Third: My biggest takeaway from listening is that the industry is really changing. As a user, I also chase airdrops and play on-chain. Now, my experience with VC projects is that I don't even want to chase airdrops. Starting from zk, many airdrop rules have become opaque. Before, it was clearly stated why you did not meet the qualifications, but now the situation is that who qualifies and who does not is decided by the project parties, with no clear rules on who gets airdrops and why.
This blind box mechanism, similar to those projects listed on Binance, is one after another. Project parties want to PUA retail investors to gather data, want to PUA retail investors to deposit money, aiming for ecology, TVL, and activity. But after depositing money and generating data, they get listed on Binance and then dump the price. I believe this model is one of the reasons users have lost confidence in VC coins.
To be honest, I don't think Binance can change the current situation. I have no blame towards Binance. My biggest experience is disappointment with these VC projects and experiencing the significant changes in the industry.
If I were Binance, I would feel I have no right to stop users from trading anything. In other words, if it's a doomed project, trash still needs to be listed because of the hype. If you don't like it, then short it; it's nothing. My personal experience does not hinge on whether Binance has any insider information, but rather that in this already familiar model, the game between users and project parties has reached a critical point.
In my view, Binance is more like a medium. Project parties know that retail investors want to make money from airdrops, and users also know that project parties want to make money. Binance, caught in the middle, is more about the friction between users and project parties.
Going a step deeper, I personally feel that the industry has developed to this extent, which is quite an awkward situation. When IEOs first came out, MATIC had hundreds of times the increase, and users' perception was that ‘if it’s listed on Binance, it can make money.’
But now those top projects are raising billions, and getting listed directly at a valuation of hundreds of billions. Who will pick up the tab? To put it bluntly, it seems that the consensus has been reached between users chasing airdrops and project parties. Both groups sell as soon as the market opens because users know that these VC coins have no value. Chasing airdrops is not value investing. Project parties probably also realize that once listed on Binance, they can cash out and relax. This game can no longer be played, so those secondary players will suffer a lot. Only primary arbitrage players can make some money.
Fourth: Where is the way out for users?
I have experienced that it is precisely because the industry has changed that on-chain opportunities will rise. Without VCs and high valuations, if I lose money, it is due to my own lack of skill. Even if there is insider information, it can probably be seen through tools like GMGN by checking wallet addresses. In a fairer market, retail investors will have greater opportunities.
Lastly, one most important point, my biggest takeaway after listening to the entire space is: Am I taking the market for granted? It’s like in 2019 I could make money through IEOs, so I thought it would continue indefinitely. In 2021, I could make money through airdrops, so I thought it would last forever. In 2023, I could make money through inscriptions, so I thought it would go on forever. I believe this is also why many people held ETH this round, only to be surprised when SOL performed better than ETH, because ‘it had always been like this.’
It may be this cognitive inertia that leads me to feel that "Binance's new coins are profitable" and "the airdrops from projects with large financing are meant to make you rich." The core point is that "the methods I used in the last cycle can make money in this cycle."
The reason I say the experience is profound is that I suddenly feel that "actually, each cycle is the same; the methods that made money in the last cycle do not work in this cycle."
Essentially, users feel, why was it possible before, but not now? I feel the same way, but after going through various projects and listening to the complete space today, this feeling has become very profound.
I think as a user, it is also necessary to embrace change like those industry leaders, actively try new ways to make money, abandon familiar patterns, and accept the fact that the methods that worked before are no longer viable. This might be one of the ways out for users.
